HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2008-09-23 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Address in Reply

ADDRESS IN REPLY

Adjourned debate on motion for adoption (resumed on motion).

(Continued from page 175.)

Mrs PENFOLD (Flinders) (16:28): I congratulate our Governor, His Excellency Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce, on the excellent work he has undertaken within our state. His visit, and that of the Lieutenant Governor, to my community on the Eyre Peninsula, have been greatly appreciated.

The government's claimed intention to foster economic growth, prosperity and opportunity for all South Australians, as outlined in its address, only highlights the huge lost opportunities since this government came to power seven years ago. These opportunities were provided by the massive increase in the income to the state from the GST, increased fees and charges and the good government of the previous Liberal government, which had to recover from the massive State Bank debt left to it by the former Labor government. This government is still talking about water, infrastructure and the potential of mining, but the rhetoric was summed up by The Advertiser's heading on the address, 'Nothing new in Rann agenda'.

South Australia, and particularly the west of South Australia, has been the poor cousin compared to the other states in relation to major infrastructure. If we are to take advantage of mining, in particular, for future prosperity, we need to address infrastructure shortfalls urgently. It is a hopeful sign, therefore, that the federal government has established Infrastructure Australia and has called for submissions to advise on infrastructure priorities of national importance.

This Labor government must stand up and demand its fair share of the $20 billion-plus Build Australia fund, part of the $55 billion left in the Future Fund by the former federal Liberal government, if it is to assist with the identified priorities to becoming realities, enabling our state to move forward from its present comatose condition.

Funding for infrastructure to come from a percentage of mining royalties has been suggested. However, mining royalties last financial year in South Australia were only $165 million, and we need more than that. The royalties in South Australia were only a fraction of the $3.6 billion in Queensland and a similar amount received in Western Australia. The western half of South Australia has a lack of physical infrastructure without which this huge region cannot fulfil its potential to assist Australia to meet its economic, social and environmental goals. The region already produces 40 per cent of the state's grain, 65 per cent of the state's seafood and more tourism than any other region; and, now, with aero-magnetic surveys and other modern techniques showing what mineralisation is contained under the land surface, we can possibly rival Queensland and Western Australia with our minerals exports but not without the infrastructure. The following is a list of infrastructure projects needed if this potential is to be tapped:

a ring main to stabilise the state's power supply;

a 20-metre deepwater port near Port Neill to enable the loading of the Cape Bulker ships that have become the world standard;

the upgrade of the Port of Thevenard, or a port close by;

an upgrade and extension of the 680 kilometres of narrow gauge railway and eventual connection to the Australian rail system, preferably at Tarcoola, the intersection of the east-west and north-south railways;

desalination plants at Ceduna, Streaky Bay, Port Kenny, Elliston, Port Lincoln and Port Augusta;

the Wirrulla-Glendambo road, which will also provide the route for power and water (and eventually a rail connection) for the northern mining developments to Eyre Peninsula ports so that minerals do not have to be sent out of Darwin; and

the upgrade of the Port Lincoln airport (which is the busiest airport outside Adelaide but which is unable to take jets) and the Ceduna airport.

Based largely on the massive Gawler Craton mineralisation, there is the potential for billions of dollars of mining royalties to be gained for South Australia if the infrastructure is built. The minerals contained in this region are being recognised around the world, as illustrated by the significant interest that has been shown. Mining requires a plentiful, stable power source. South Australia can not only provide this but also it can lead the nation in environmental sustainability and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The west coast of Eyre Peninsula is recognised as one of the best in the world for wind energy, with 135 megawatts already installed, another 400 megawatts waiting and the capacity for plenty more.

Plentiful water is another necessity for this state to progress, and there is the opportunity (even in the short term) for wind and solar power desalination plants to replace immediately more than 20 gigalitres of water currently being taken from overdrawn underground water basins and from the River Murray. By better utilising our natural resources of minerals, wind and solar energy from the western region of the state, we will have a cleaner environment, plentiful water, more funds to provide better services, an increased economic standard of living for Australians, more people employed throughout the state, leading to better mental and physical health, and reduced social disadvantage in our cities and our regions.

The priorities as outlined will be the natural outcome from planned strategic infrastructure builds. Our productive capacity, productivity, economic capability and global competitive advantages will all be significantly enhanced. Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced and social equity and quality of life in our cities and our regions will be enhanced with the natural development of our major cities that provide many of the services that will be needed.

The first priority of the state government to ensure this state's success must be the building of the power ring main. This link is required to stabilise South Australia's power supply and enable the input of more than 400 megawatts of wind, solar thermal and significant megawatts of hot-rock power into the grid. The existing power supply from the coal-fired power station at Port Augusta is no longer acceptable technology and will become even more so in the future. Significant green energy generated from the West Coast of South Australia will enable offtakes, particularly by northern mining companies, including BHP's Roxby Downs expansion (which will require 400 megawatts of additional power), plus processing plants, to add value to our minerals. This green energy can power desalination plants to provide the water that is needed.

Currently, the very old 132 KV line without a return which services the Eyre Peninsula cannot even take all the power from the 70 megawatt Mount Millar wind farm located near Cleve on the Eyre Peninsula in case it collapses the system and takes out Adelaide's power. By linking the power transmission in a ring, any breakage to the line will not take out the whole state's power supply. It will enable intakes and offtakes around its whole perimeter and ensure safe connection into Australia's main power grid of significant quantities of 'green' wind, solar thermal and hot-rock energy. Proponents are already willing and able to undertake the construction of the ring main, the 400 megawatt wind farm, the hot rocks, solar/gas power supplies, the desalination plants and numerous mines. All it takes is the will of this state Labor government to look past BHP Port Augusta and Whyalla to see the whole picture.

Despite an enormous amount of positive mineral exploration, very few mines are coming into production. Companies which are ready to start to export are working in isolation; and, unless cohesively pulled together to address their common issues, companies will continue to struggle on in isolation, taking many years, if ever, to become profitable for themselves, the state and the nation. The key to success for companies and the state is the necessary infrastructure. It is increasingly obvious that a modern, multi-use port on the east coast of Eyre Peninsula (north of Port Lincoln and south of Port Neill) is needed to provide for the future imports and exports of Eyre Peninsula and commercialisation of the extensive Gawler Craton mineralisation.

The issues regarding the physical export of minerals are highlighting just how inadequate the present road, rail, port and even the air infrastructure is for the future development of Eyre Peninsula and the advancement of the state and the nation. Port, road and rail infrastructure into and out of Port Lincoln is already under pressure just coping with grain trucks and the expansion of the city. The Port Lincoln port operated by Flinders Ports is under utilised. It is said to be only at 15 per cent capacity and declining. However, it will never be able to be fully utilised, despite having reasonably deep water and rail access, because of its central location within the city. Road access to the port is poor as it is provided via busy central business routes. The port cannot handle the Cape Bulker ships needed for the lowest cost freight in competitive international markets.

The people of the city are not in favour of the export of minerals from the wharf and there is an opportunity now to plan a staged redevelopment of the port. Port Lincoln's mayor, Peter Davis, was one of a group of local people who went to look at the port facilities and infrastructure at Esperance in Western Australia. Mayor Davis has written a report advising that he will not support using Port Lincoln for the exports of minerals. This report reflects the thinking of almost all the residents. The fishing industry has also come out strongly against it. Murray Point, the former BHP site south of Port Lincoln, which had been proposed as a possible solution for the export of minerals, requires transporting with barges. It is currently designated for future expansion of the city, which remains the best use of this site, in my opinion.

A public-private partnership, government or private enterprise could build a new port on a greenfield site in conjunction with an extended and upgraded railway, improved road network and possibly slurry pipelines to provide for mineral and grain exports and any imports, as required. Value-adding before export of our commodities should be undertaken, where possible, and the inclusion of an iron ore pellet plant incorporated in the initial port plans would be strategic. As a new port is developed, the present wharf precinct in Port Lincoln should gradually be sold off to provide for fishing, tourism and housing. The funds reinvested by the beneficiaries into the new greenfield port, with Flinders Ports being part of the project at a new site, if possible.

Given the quantity of minerals on Eyre Peninsula and the potential growth of Port Lincoln, the wharf is never going to be a long-term solution for the export of minerals. Grain trucks are already a problem on the Lincoln Highway due to increased local and visitor traffic and several kilometres of the highway are not able to be widened. The proposed alternative route is getting more and more expensive and difficult as the hills are being subdivided and built on. The fishing industry does not have enough room for future expansion. However, they would have more flexibility if the wharf became more available, with grain exports gradually relocating to a new port.

The recreational jetty (No. 1 berth at the wharf) would also remain available for the tourists and recreational fishers where access is presently under threat. Cruise ships expected to visit the city in the near future could be easily catered for in the wharf-city precinct, with plenty of room for facilities. The same would apply to yachts that could be facilitated and given much easier access to the yacht club and the centre of the city. Private marina berths off the wharf area could be sold generating additional funding, as well as creating the kind of ambience that I believe would enhance our city similar to that currently enjoyed by Hobart and Darwin.

The grain market has been deregulated and a new grain marketing group formed under the auspices of Free Eyre. They will not necessarily be using the silos but large bags to hold and segregate their grain. This will mean that they will need more space and will not be using the large cement silos at the wharf. Many of these silos are getting old now and I have been told that some may need to be pulled down as has already happened in Western Australia, where some have also been converted to high-rise housing developments.

I understand ABB Grain owns the grain silos, sheds and gantries at the Port Lincoln wharf. However, to export minerals from either the main wharf, the BHP area or the fuel wharf, if the fuel is taken elsewhere, will require extensive new mineral specific infrastructure and more space. It would make sense for ABB Grain to be part of a new port project and to put in dual-purpose, new dustproof gantries in a port catering for bulk fertilisers, grain and minerals in an environmentally friendly manner. Modern fertiliser unloading equipment and sheds, and eventually even new fuel unloading and tanks located at a new port and the old ones removed from our city centre, would free up more space in our city and provide more accessible services for our communities in a much safer location. As a new dedicated fuel wharf would probably have to be built, this may not happen for some time but should be planned for now. The existing fuel wharf could be repaired and made available for tourism and recreational use, which would be much more compatible with its recreational location.

Centrex Metals Limited is only the first of many mining companies that wants to export iron ore. At present, their only option is to export from Port Lincoln. Accordingly, the problem must be fixed now to gain the benefits for our region and the state of having a robust and productive mining industry, while retaining and possibly improving Port Lincoln's development and ambience. It would be judicious if existing grain and fertiliser companies' activities were also encompassed.

There has been and continues to be a range of problems with the exporting of grain from the wharf. Grain dust for asthma sufferers has long been a problem. Anecdotally, the numbers of people suffering from asthma is increasing and some of whom I am aware actually leave the town. The native galahs, I am told, were not originally found in Port Lincoln but have followed the grain, have bred prolifically, are offensively noisy and ruin the trees. Pigeons, also attracted by the grain, have bred up and make an awful mess in the city.

Continuing on with infrastructure in western South Australia, the Port of Thevenard also requires deepening and upgrading. If the Port of Thevenard is not upgraded, or one close by, then the new port south of Port Neill would become the only major port to service the whole of Eyre Peninsula and minerals from the north-west may have to be brought down. Thevenard currently handles a greater tonnage of product than Port Lincoln. Even existing salt and gypsum exports from Thevenard would be under threat without an upgrade. Port Bonython at the top of Spencer Gulf near Whyalla is poorly located in an area that is very environmentally vulnerable. The Whyalla port requires multiple handling and barging, and is to be fully utilised by OneSteel which is allowing no other companies access.

The rail system on Eyre Peninsula is another major piece of infrastructure that needs to be upgraded and coordinated into the big picture. Genesee Wyoming is the current owner of the Eyre Peninsula railway, however the narrow gauge railway line is not the most suitable for haulage of iron ore and needs upgrading. A rail upgrade could become part of the new port project. A new railway line would have the provision for upgrading to standard gauge and be redirected along a new section (approximately 25 to 30 kilometres) from Ungarra to the new port to take all freight, including grain and minerals.

The railway land in Port Lincoln could then revert back to Colonel Light's original plan and become parklands and any excess land could be sold. The government could use proceeds to assist with the upgrade and extension of the rail to the new port. Liverpool Street, the main CBD street in Port Lincoln, could be extended through to Kirton Point and Porter Bay, providing easy access to the marina. The rail that presently runs through the middle of the town could go and the ambience and views would return as the large silos and the green gantries are eventually demolished.

Improved water infrastructure is long overdue. In the driest state in the driest continent, Labor governments, state and federal, continue to overlook the obvious. Access to SA Water pipes is a must for desalinated water from private enterprise providers to be delivered in a timely and cost-effective manner so we can all enjoy plentiful water and not have it eked out through permanent restrictions, and also to provide for the mining and value-adding of products, plus horticultural developments, on our good soils. This Labor government should insist on it.

A clean, green Ceduna desalination solar/ thermal/mechanical vapour compression plant was to have been built by Lloyd Energy, but it has been built interstate instead. The desalination plant would have replaced water which is being taken from the overdrawn underground water basin south of Port Lincoln and which is being pumped to Ceduna. When the water gets there, it is so mineralised that it is costing thousands of dollars to replace piping and water filters in the region that are blocked solid with minerals.

Quantities of potable water are needed to enable the mineral sands to be processed locally. However, they are now to be shipped to Western Australia for processing—denying local employment opportunities. With a minuscule amount of government support, water could be running through the pipes and jobs could be created, underpinning successful regional communities.

A reverse osmosis desalination system near Streaky Bay is being proposed to take pressure off the local, overdrawn Robinson Basin, which, unbelievably, is being topped up with water pumped from the basins south of Port Lincoln. The world-class kaolin deposit mining contract may fall over because of the lack of water, unless a suitable supply is provided in the near future in order to enable the processing of kaolin locally.

A proposed wind-powered desalination plant will be constructed near Elliston, with the water being pumped into the existing pipe system at Polda pumping station in order to be used across the region, as soon as the wind turbines are constructed and approval gained from SA Water.

The proposed wind-powered desalination plant at Port Lincoln has not been facilitated, but it could have provided new water into the existing pipeline system that services Eyre Peninsula and negated the $48.6 million pipeline which was built by SA Water and which brings 1.4 gigalitres of water 800 kilometres from the overstretched River Murray system.

In Port Augusta Acquasol proposed a solar/gas/mechanical vapour compression desalination and power plant to provide all the water needed by Spencer Gulf cities, and possibly the BHP expansion at Roxby Downs, to take them off River Murray water, but despite all the efforts of private proponents this project continues to stumble.

All these desalination plants can be put in place by private enterprise which so far has been thwarted by the state government-owned monopoly, SA Water—a monopoly backed by a water minister who blithely states 'it is not my priority' and who is supported by her Labor colleagues to prevent new water being provided in the system by private enterprise. Instead they are spending millions of taxpayers' funds to reduce consumption of the very product—water—that they have the monopoly to sell.

Infrastructure Australia must also plan for road infrastructure, including the Wirrulla to Glendambo road. This road will also provide a route for power and water, and eventually, possibly, a rail connection from the northern mining developments to Eyre Peninsula ports. It should be the responsibility of state and federal governments to fund this road. It is becoming increasingly busy, with traffic from many outback mining activities and hundreds of tourists, many of whom are from overseas. All these users are impacting heavily on people in local communities, especially isolated stations along the way, who have to rescue them when they get into trouble, while coping with the wear and tear on roads which are not built for traffic. Already there have been deaths on the road.

Finally, I refer to Port Lincoln airport. It is the busiest regional airport in South Australia, with 140,000 passengers annually. It is owned and operated by the District Council of Lower Eyre Peninsula which has a district population of 4,402. The City of Port Lincoln, with a population of 14,500, is the closest major city to the airport (being approximately 15 kilometres away) and gains the most benefit. A flight from Port Lincoln to Adelaide across Spencer Gulf takes about 35 minutes compared with the seven hour drive (675 kilometres) around the top of the gulf. A bus journey to Adelaide takes up to 13 hours one way, excluding unexpected delays.

Virgin Blue has expressed an interest in introducing a regional jet service to Port Lincoln as part of its recently announced E-Jet program. The introduction of a regular jet service and the accompanying passenger and baggage screening requirements means additional space would be needed. The District Council of Lower Eyre Peninsula is investigating possible options, including a new terminal. Council has indicated that it has a broad strategy to enable this to happen and is planning to upgrade most of the airside facilities (including the taxiways, apron and lighting) this financial year. It also has funding for concept plans for a terminal upgrade and intends to finalise a business plan for the airport in order to help it plan for future operations and development.

However, the benefit of a jet service is something that the small rural district council will have to consider carefully because the capital expenditure and recurring maintenance costs on a new or upgraded terminal with security equipment will be significant. Once again, government assistance is needed to fast-track this much needed infrastructure.

If the Rudd government truly 'is serious about bringing national leadership and new thinking to the planning and financing and building of economic infrastructure', then the state Labor government actually needs to get active and speak up federally for South Australia. Currently, projects are not being viewed on a whole of state basis, thereby lacking the planning and funding to solve the problem of the stability of the state's power grid and the need to put vast quantities of available green energy into it. Planning needs to include the retirement of old dirty power stations, while providing sufficient power for the massive developments that will be needing it.

Most of the infrastructure needed will be provided by private enterprise, possibly as public-private partnerships, but they definitely will need to be facilitated by federal, state and local governments, with Infrastructure Australia providing the coordination and Build Australia providing some of the funding. Funding provided now will have a return on investment in billions of dollars within a few years. It is the role of government to facilitate significant projects. No one company should have the responsibility to provide the initial infrastructure that will be of long-term benefit to so many, including both the state and federal governments, in royalties, taxes and economic activity.

No farmer would use only their home paddock to provide their income, but this city-centric government, in effect, is doing just that. It is unsustainable, if we are to remain a first world nation and not become a third world nation that cannot afford health, education and other services expected by our people.

Some of the mining ventures on Eyre Peninsula expected over the next few years are:

The Centrex hematite iron ore reserve at Wilgerup near Lock has a 10 million tonne reserve that they are confident of increasing. Mining is expected to start in 2011-12.

Centrex also has a magnetite iron ore deposit on Eyre Peninsula with identified exploration targets exceeding two billion tonnes of magnetite ore in the southern and south central tenements with another major deposit near Cowell.

Lincoln Minerals has hematite and magnetite iron ore at Gum Flat, about 20 kilometres from Port Lincoln, and has an exploration target of more than 250 million tonnes of ore at the project.

Adelaide Resources' iron ore project, 175 kilometres from Port Lincoln, contains extensive magnetite anomalies with a cumulative strike length in excess of 50 kilometres. It has launched a new company, Iron Road, to handle it.

North of Kimba, at the Wilcherry Hill, is the Ironclad Mining Company's iron ore deposit. The Wilcherry deposit contains coarse crystalline magnetite and low silica contents, which enable low cost and efficient production of concentrates containing over 70 per cent iron with very low impurity levels.

In addition, not far away is the Menninnie Dam site, where there is said to be a crew currently working 24 hours a day exploring for zinc, lead and copper with the potential also for iron ore. The Kimba to Buckleboo railway line that links through to Ungarra is currently closed, but would not be far from these deposits.

Minotaur's kaolin deposit near Streaky Bay, which is of very high quality with nine million-plus tonnes (150 million tonnes inferred) and is expected to start in 2008-09, if power and water are available.

Adelaide Resources has mineral sands, uranium and iron ore deposits on Eyre Peninsula. Its testing at Warramboo indicates a significant strike length of magnetite bearing iron ore of exceptional chemical quality and substantial tonnage; and there are many more besides.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (16:55): I respond to the address to the 51st parliament by His Excellency Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce AC CSC RANR, Governor of South Australia, although I will not be able to do justice to all the topics raised by His Excellency. However, I wish to draw to His Excellency's attention in this response some areas of importance that are relevant to portfolio interests for which I have the honour of serving Her Majesty's Opposition. First are the statements made by His Excellency, commencing at page 7 of the published speech, relating to questions of health, commencing with:

My government will continue to work to modernising and upgrade South Australia's health infrastructure.

It goes on to identify some capital works projects. There is a complete omission in relation to country health reform—that is the first observation I make—and I bring to His Excellency's attention the concerns that I have for the government's insistence on continuing to provide the wrong facts, the wrong priorities and the wrong approaches to the provision of health services in this state.

I start with country health. The government decided in June that it would impose upon country health residents—there are nearly half a million of them in this state—a new era, a new regime, in relation to the health services in their hospitals, particularly acute care services in country regions. It backfired badly and the government was forced to withdraw its plan and to start again. But that was not without the government spending $400,000 in an advertising campaign to try to ram it down the throats of country people, to try to convince them that the joining of the dots by the government was actually in their interest. They wholly rejected it, rightly so, and the government, only today, has released a task force review paper, which calls upon the government to properly consult and to prepare a new plan.

That is something which, frankly, a whole lot of taxpayers' money has been wasted on and much pain and angst has been met particularly by country people, including the health professionals who provide services to them, and relatives and family of patients in those communities. I say that this misallocation of funding is of very serious concern. I note, however, that His Excellency did not mention it at all in his speech. On page 7 of his speech, in reference to GP Plus centres, he said:

These centres are being established in order to ease the pressure on emergency departments.

That statement is relevant to the almost daily crisis that occurs in our major public hospitals in metropolitan Adelaide and what we call access block in emergency departments. That is, when too many people are turning up needing emergency department assessment and stabilising and there are not enough services and facilities for them to be taken into the hospital, in particular, into beds. The government's indication here is that it is going to introduce these GP Plus centres or expand services to facilitate that.

I bring to His Excellency's attention that the government has also been busy with another big publicity campaign which has involved huge advertisements in the paper, on radio and on television, posing the question, 'Is it really an emergency?', with a weeping woman in the picture. Ostensibly it is saying, 'Let's keep our emergency departments for emergencies,' and asks the poor old punter whether it is serious enough to go to the hospital. As was made abundantly clear by myriad experts at a recent meeting of the Australasian College of Emergency Medicine in Melbourne, which was well publicised and was very well attended from across the nation, the truth is that two things are very evident. One is that South Australia has the worst performing response in relation to access block in emergency departments. In fact, on the material they showed us in September, it was nearly off the chart. That was put down to the doctors' dispute in South Australia, but, when we looked to September, earlier this month, it was still well above the rest of the country.

That ought to tell the government that there is a serious problem here. It is a problem across the country because, as the data provided to us confirms, in the 2003-04 year, 202 people per thousand presented to emergency departments, and a massive increase in demand has occurred since which has taken that figure to 311 per thousand in 2006-07.

So, we know that demand has increased. Yet, correspondingly, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, in its lifetime, this government has reduced the beds. In 2000-01, the number of beds in South Australia was 5,088 in our public hospitals, including our psychiatric hospitals and, in 2006-07, it had reduced to 4,895 beds. Here we have an increase in demand and a reduction in beds. The government is saying that you should not be going to emergency departments if it is not serious enough and that it will have these GP centres which are going to help people avert the problem.

This conference revealed that less than 5 per cent of people who presented to emergency departments can be described as people who could be treated by a general practitioner, assuming the general practitioner's service was open and available at that time or that an appointment could be obtained. They made it very clear that this was not the problem and, in fact, this small percentage of people who turn up are easily and quickly disposed of in the sense that they are assessed and dealt with and often sent home. So, they are not a problem at all. They said this is not a problem. The problem is beds—repeatedly, the problem is beds—but the government does not want to hear that.

Your Excellency, I wish you to be very clear that your government, which you have described here in this presentation, is not actually addressing the real problem. As to the wrong priorities, let us consider this: the government has announced that it will redevelop the Glenside Hospital site. It is a $190 million proposal involving 126 beds that it will provide at this new facility. That is welcomed in the sense that there will be a capital investment in the psychiatric services that are necessary for secure and acute care in this state.

However, the problem is that the government has also announced that it will sell 42 per cent of the site. It thinks a supermarket is more important for mental health patients and acute services. It also wants to sell off this land for private housing, yet there is a demonstrable need for housing for people with mental health needs. Even if the government says it cannot afford to build the extra services for mental health patients and people who need to be rehabilitated in a step-up program, as recommended by Commissioner Cappo, we have asked the government repeatedly at least not to sell off the asset until it has the money.

The government is selling off three very valuable properties in metropolitan Adelaide which currently accommodate drug and alcohol services in this state. It is also vacating two properties on Greenhill Road south of the city which operate as headquarters for drug and alcohol services. To say to us that the government has no money is just not acceptable. It vindicates what I say in this regard. It is scandalous for the government to say that it does not have enough money while at the same time announcing that it will create a film and screen hub as a home for the SA Film Corporation on the original sanatorium premises, which currently houses the administration on the Glenside Hospital site. It is an abandonment of the need for psychiatric services for the state.

Country people have only 20 beds, and that is it. They will not get any more beds for the provision of services to them. Yet, the government says that it has to sell off 42 per cent of the site and it will spend $47.5 million to relocate the SA Film Corporation into the heritage building which is the main administration site on the property. The Premier's department is paying $2.5 million to buy that piece of land which is about 1.7 hectares and which has all of the heritage property on it. I thought it was a pretty good buy that the Premier got, but apparently he has another $45 million to spend.

Here is the interesting thing, and I want His Excellency to understand the significance of this, because he is being asked to present to the parliament as though there is some priority for psychiatric health for this government. On page 8, he states:

And the Government will continue to reform, rebuild and re-design mental health services and facilities that include community recovery centres, new hospital wards, supported accommodation and modern drug treatments.

That is the spin that is given on it, and there is another paragraph in relation to it. That is what the Governor has been asked to tell us, but I wish to remind His Excellency that the government has already bulldozed one of the historic buildings on the site. It has transferred the administration staff from the hospital into those. It is proceeding with the progression of the re-fit and redevelopment (the $45 million worth) of the accommodation for the new home of the SA Film Corporation, and not one sod has been turned to develop the new hospital.

We have not even seen any tenders go out, let alone be accepted, even to build a new hospital. The design has not even been done yet. There is plenty of money, time and resources to start renovating for a new home for the SA Film Corporation, which has a perfectly good facility at Hendon while 10,000 people a year use mental health services in the state, yet there is no time, money, allocation or priority for these services. That is the truth of it, and I want His Excellency to understand that this drivel that he has been asked to present to the parliament is not an accurate reflection of what is really happening out there.

In relation to the nurses workforce, as just one example of the government's wrong approach, the government says to us and, in fact, again on page 8 it states:

Extra doctors, nurses, paramedics and allied health professionals will continue to be recruited into the public health system.

It sounds good, doesn't it? The Minister for Health frequently comes into this chamber and tells us that he has X number of new doctors and X number of new nurses in our public health system. It sounds good, doesn't it?

Here is the truth of the situation: whilst there has been a 193-bed reduction, which I referred to earlier, in our public hospitals during the lifetime of this government, in 2001-02 we had a workforce of 7,625 nurses in our public hospitals, including psychiatric hospitals—again, as reported by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

Yes, that has increased to 8,821 in 2006-07; according to their statistics, that is an increase. How many actually work in hospitals, in wards and not in offices or in cars we do not know, because the minister could not actually tell us that during estimates. So, there has been an increase in actual workforce. There has been a very significant decrease in beds. Here is the interesting thing: according to the Nurses Board, which is in charge of the registration of nurses in this state, in 2001-02 there were 23,638 registered and enrolled nurses qualified in this state who were registered for the purposes of approval to practise. In 2006-07, that increased by some 5,000 nurses to 28,140.

So, we have had a very big increase in qualified nurses in this state but a very small corresponding increase in nurses actually working in the public sector in this state. That, I think, is very telling and, interestingly, the concerns are raised by the nurses themselves. I have letters regularly from nurses—some direct, some anonymous—who are very worried about the fact that the government is not managing the nursing workforce appropriately, that there has been really an exodus and a breach of a relationship between an employer and employee in treating them with respect and that we have actually ended up in a situation in the nursing world where there has been a massive increase in the use of agency nurses. That can only be financially crippling for any government. Let me read you the statements made just by one received this month:

Dear Ms Chapman, Management of Glenside Hospital are currently in dispute with the nurses union over the use of Agency staff in preference to regular staff to fill casual vacancies. Casual vacancies are becoming more frequent because of the shortage of nurses. The use of agency staff is therefore becoming a more significant factor in the care of mental health patients. The area I work in is currently using 25 per cent agency staff on a regular basis. The worst day recently 60 per cent agency.

That is a horrific figure—he or she did not say that: that was my comment on that. This nurse goes on to say:

The system is in a shambles. Regular staff are becoming stressed having to carry the extra load of agency staff and having to be concerned about their own safety because agency staff do not know the system or the patients. Stress leads to sick leave which exacerbates the problem. Regular staff look at the rosters, note the days with excess agency staff and take sick leave themselves out of concern to their safety.

That is what is coming from the nursing workforce who are in the hospitals currently run by this government. It is a grave concern, because these are valuable people, not just as machinery and operation but also in the care of people in South Australia who require hospital services. I think it is important for His Excellency to appreciate how serious the situation is. This issue is not just about numbers: this is about maintaining a workforce, a level of respect and also some financial management to ensure that we have a workforce able to provide for the services in our acute care.

The other level, I suppose, of dealing with the wrong approach relates to the way clinicians and others are being consulted. The government says, 'We want to go out and consult.' We only have to look at the country health plan to see what a sham that was. Many professional bodies—nurses, doctors, dentists—are regularly asked to serve on advisory committees to the government. Let me give you an example of just one of the letters I have received.

In this case it was from the dentists because, not surprisingly, they have a professional body and one of the committees that they are asked to provide is SA's Oral Health Advisory Committee. They have written to me, and also expressed concern to the minister, because of what they say they are exposed to and the way they are treated in the general advice and consultation that they are expected to provide free of charge, arguably in the interests of their profession (there is a vested interest), but these people have a real concern for their patients and the health of South Australia, in this case, the oral health.

They explain in a letter, again received this month, that SA's Oral Health Advisory Committee had been asked to contribute a view on the government's proposed State Oral Health Plan. In the meantime, they have also been asked to present a view as to the question of who should use particular expertise and what training was required for a proposal which related to expanding the patients that a dental therapist could be relied upon to treat, not just children in this case, but to remove the age limit and let them treat adults. The letter states:

It appears to us that the purpose of the Oral Health Advisory Committee is seen by Department officers as a vehicle to communicate changes the Government intends to make rather than to utilise the expertise and experience of the members for the provision of advice to the Department and yourself. Our experience is that even when the majority of the committee agrees on a particular direction, public servants are reluctant to record this as they seem to be more concerned about how the Minister will view the matter than putting forward the Committee's opinion.

This is particularly the case in relation to what is written into the State Oral Health Plan and the failure to observe the Committee's wishes often uses the justification that the Minister would or wouldn't allow this. Most recently, the Committee seemed to agree that a thorough examination of actual workforce and patient needs is required, taking into account a range of perspectives and not just the desires of the SA Dental Service. The committee also seemed to be of the view that the respective roles of all providers of care—

it goes on to say dentists, therapists, etc—

should be properly examined to discover which group is best placed, trained and educated to meet a particular need and that this role should be defined and included in the Regulations, rather than have matters dealt with on a case by case basis by the Dental Board of South Australia. Whilst this request for inclusion was eventually acceded to, the public servants only agreed to do so if the original proposal relating to dental therapists was included as well. This domination by public servants makes a mockery of the name 'Advisory Committee' and is insulting to the committee members. Further, it seems that there is an expectation that the committee will simply 'rubber stamp' what the author writes into the plan which is purported to be a plan for the whole state…

I want His Excellency to know that this is blackmail. It is unacceptable behaviour for any government to allow its bureaucrats to demand of a committee that it gives only views that are consistent with the minister's views. That is an absolute disgrace. To then go on and say 'If you don't agree with what we are going to put up on this we are not going to accept your advice' is unacceptable behaviour by anyone, but for a government to be presenting this to one of its own advisory committees is an insult and is professionally demeaning. How on earth does the government expect to continue to receive advice from these people or from other different groups that it calls upon for advice?

The answer is very clear, and I want His Excellency to know that the government does not want their advice and it does not want their contribution: it wants complete control. Dr Sherbon, Dr Panter, all the head honchos in the Department of Health, want absolute control. That is an illustration of what I see as totally unacceptable behaviour by this government, and it is about time that minister Hill—who keeps telling us that, under the Health Care Act, the buck stops with him—did something about it and does not allow the situation to prevail. If you do not want consultation do not go out there and masquerade or pretend that you actually care about what people think and will take notice. Clearly, that is a complete and utter nonsense under this government.

Finally, on page 15 a comment is made—I think quite sincerely by His Excellency—about priorities in child protection. There are thousands of children who come under the responsibility of the Minister for Families and Communities as their legal guardian. We all know these children are often severely damaged through no fault of their own—they have parents or a parent who is unable or unwilling to look after them, or there are circumstances in which it is too risky to allow them to stay—and the minister therefore takes responsibility. It is a responsibility of the whole of the state but the minister has that direct job. He is prepared to keep spending $26 million a year in motel accommodation and supervision of these children in those motels—yet he pretends that he cares and wants to support the foster care system. What a joke!

Foster carers are out there in the community and I do not doubt for one moment that, with the numbers, they are probably finding it difficult to keep up with demand. However, for minister Weatherill, the former minister for families and communities, to go out there and say, 'We value these people; they open their hearts and their homes to the broken children of this state,' is a complete nonsense when the government then turns around and says to them, 'We are going to provide you with extra financial support to help look after these children.'

That is what he announced as a big initiative in this budget. Yet what he did was this: instead of having a base payment for the care of a child of a certain age group and then provision for transport, reimbursement for damages to their property, provision of extra medication for the children or for special needs and expenses of the children (depending on their special needs), he said, 'I am going to introduce a program where they will get a new base amount of money with 25 per cent, 30 per cent, 40 per cent, 50 per cent or 100 per cent extra depending on an agreed provision for the children.'

Well, that is interesting. The Hon. Jennifer Rankine has now taken over this responsibility, and it must have been on day one that the government produced a pamphlet about what the new rate was to be. However, it cannot even add up, because we now have a situation where carers get no recompense, reimbursement or compensation for all those other expenses, but the extra 20 per cent or 30 per cent is not actually that. On the forms that have now come out, the new base payment to look after a child between five and 12 years of age, for example, is $304.20 a fortnight. It is not a lot of money but, let us face it, these people do not do this for the money. They are then offered a 25 per cent loading, logically taking the total payment to $380.25. However, the amount the carers actually get, in the published material, is $362.70. So, base payment plus 25 per cent loading for a child with perhaps a minor special need—but it is not 25 per cent; it is actually 19.23 per cent

I do not know what donkeys are doing the additions in these departments, but a program has been introduced that the government says will make it easier for everyone, that they will not have to keep all those receipts (except for the initial assessment), and that they will give them this all-encompassing extra percentage—and then it does not even give them the right amount.

The government insults them by short-changing them on the paltry amount of money it allocates them. How can you possibly encourage more people to come forward to undertake this often thankless task of looking after these most needy of children if you do not treat those carers with respect and give them proper information? If you say you will do something in relation to a pay rise at least give them the pay rise you have published and try not to cheat them, as well as giving them the training and support they need. This government is full swing into saying something and then delivering something else. All talk and no action. When it does deliver on something it is nowhere near what has been promised in some advertising campaign—which, of course, has been tacked onto the cost for taxpayers.

So I do not have a lot of good news in my reply to the Governor's address, but I want His Excellency to be absolutely clear that this government has not been frank with the people of South Australia. It clearly has not been frank with the Governor in asking him to read this speech, because these areas have not been accurate; it has not told the whole truth, it has clearly not been transparent, and it has simply failed to disclose what are very serious cracks in the financial management of these important areas—incidentally, a combination of health services and family and communities services in this state that take up about $5 billion. So, this is not an amount to be messed with. The fact that we have runaway problems with management of health budgets and blowouts in annual public hospital budgets is of no surprise to me, but it ought to be of great concern to the people of South Australia.

Mr BIGNELL (Mawson) (17:23): I rise to commend the Governor for his speech to open the final session of the Fifty-Second Parliament. We do indeed live in a great state and at a great time in this state's history. In the southern suburbs, and the areas of McLaren Vale, Willunga and McLaren Flat in the electorate of Mawson that I am very proud to represent in this place, things are looking very good indeed, as they are for so many other parts of South Australia.

We are investing as a government in our schools; places like Willunga High School, which is receiving $7.7 million to totally overhaul one of the great schools of the southern region. That follows on from the recent opening of the new Willunga Primary School, where the government spent well over $4 million. In the next month or so we will be at McLaren Flat Primary School to unveil the great new additions at that school.

This is a government that is investing and reinvesting in the education area of this state. It is also investing in areas like health, where we are seeing a brand-new hospital to be built in the next few years, the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital, which will be a fantastic facility for the people of South Australia and one that we can be very proud of. It is very rare indeed for any city in Australia to get a new hospital, and I think the people of South Australia will be thanking the Rann government in years to come for providing an excellent brand-new facility to give people the sort of health care that they deserve, in such a great state as South Australia.

At the same time, we are doing work in the northern suburbs on the Lyell McEwin Hospital, and down in the southern suburbs there are upgrades at the Noarlunga Hospital and also at the Flinders Medical Centre, where only a few weeks ago I went on a tour to have a look at the upgrades that they are doing there. We were able to climb down into the basement and up onto the roof of the hospital to see this top to toe overhaul of one of the great hospitals in South Australia. I know that work is also happening out in the western suburbs at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

People sometimes say that maybe we should upgrade the Royal Adelaide Hospital, but I think that anyone who knows anything about building knows that that would be an unworkable proposition. It would take a lot longer than it would take to simply build a brand-new hospital. When you upgrade an old hospital it is never going to be as good as something that is brand-new. So, I commend the Premier, the health minister and the others in cabinet who have taken this decision to build a fantastic new facility for this state.

The seat of Mawson is going to benefit greatly from the $2 billion investment by the state government in its overhaul of South Australia's transport system. There will be an electrification of the railway network, and I am very happy to see the announcement that the Noarlunga line will be the very first line in the system to be upgraded and electrified. So, we are looking for smoother, faster, more environmentally friendly trains with windows that we can see out of, and we are looking forward to an extension of that rail line down to Seaford and beyond to Aldinga. The government has set aside $34 million to purchase the corridor that will be needed to build that extension to the rail line further south to cater for the extra people who have moved into that area over the past few years.

It is always a balancing act for governments, local members and for the community as to how much building we actually do. Down in the south we are pretty well at the point where we do not want to see too much more gutter to gutter housing than what is already on the drawing board, because we have some very big developments still to come on line. What we need to ensure is that we maintain corridors of native vegetation and open space. We do have those areas there now and it is something that the Minister for the Southern Suburbs and I have been very much at the forefront of in making sure that we preserve in some way those corridors so that we can still boast in years to come that McLaren Vale is where the vines meet the sea.

It is a very beautiful part of the world and pretty much unique in Australian winegrowing regions. The Barossa is a fantastic winegrowing region but it does not have the great sandy beaches where you can drive down onto the beach and have a pleasant day with the family or visitors from interstate or other parts of South Australia. The Clare Valley, once again, produces great wines, but it is a long way from the beach. What we do have in McLaren Vale is this fantastic setting and we need to make sure that we preserve, to some extent, that setting.

We also need to make sure that we keep agricultural land there so that we can continue to grow olives and so that we have pastures for cows, because some of the great cheeses produced in Australia are produced from the Fleurieu region. I think we should be looking to support that. I know, through the Premier's Food and Wine Council and the work of the minister for agriculture, that we do support the growers and the producers in the McLaren Vale region, and there is no reason why McLaren Vale olives, cheeses and wines should not be up there with New Zealand food produce and King Island food produce.

What we find is that instead of individual producers going out on their own, if you can bulk up your branding then that is a very good thing to do. I know, from the wine industry's point of view, that is something that we are doing on the international market, that we are looking for regional heroes, we are looking for the Barossa to be out there as a region on international shelves, and we are also looking for McLaren Vale, for Clare and for Coonawarra, because they are great regions with different styles of wine, and rather than just have a marketing plan that is a blanket 'wine of Australia', what we are doing is championing the great wine regions of South Australia. So, I commend all those people who are involved in that.

Last week I took a tour with SA Great out to the western and northern areas of the city to have a look around there. In a former life I was chief of staff to the infrastructure and transport minister. I worked on a lot of projects, but when I saw them they were either proposals on a piece of paper or in someone's mind. To go out on this tour was a great experience. To see all the projects that are being built in South Australia to support the mining and defence industries is something that few South Australians have been able to do. There are some terrifically positive stories out there. It was great to have the General Manager of Channel 9, Graeme Gilbertson, on the tour with us. Also, Michael Miller, Managing Director of Advertiser Newspapers, was at the breakfast which launched the day's activities.

I think that the media does play a vital role, and while it is easy to put doom and gloom stories in the newspapers, on television and on talkback radio, some wonderful success stories are happening in South Australia. It does not hurt to inform the people of South Australia what is happening in this great state. I commend Rae Grierson for the wonderful work she does with SA Great. I was very happy to work with her to put together an itinerary that really showed off some of the development that we have here in South Australia. Our infrastructure minister, the Hon. Patrick Conlon, spoke at a breakfast at the Clipsal site, which will soon be sold off and used for medium and high density housing. What a great location that will be right next to the Parklands.

The train line is already there and we intend to extend the tramline. The Glenelg-city tramline will be extended down to the Entertainment Centre initially, and the Entertainment Centre car park, which has about 400 car parking spaces, will be used as a park and ride centre. Once the Clipsal site has that medium and high density housing on it, we will run the tramline down and connect it up to the train line. We met there and we showed these people from various small to medium sized businesses around South Australia the vision for that Clipsal site. It is one of those once in a generation opportunities we get to redevelop and almost build an entire suburb that will house hundreds of people and be a beautiful place for them to call home.

Of course, the important thing about that is that it is right on these transport corridors. We have the infrastructure in place with the railway line, and we will add some more infrastructure in terms of the tramline; and, hopefully, that will play a role in stopping further urban sprawl in the south. We have enough stuff on the drawing board now. We will have to take it a little easy with respect to what land is released in the south over the next few years, because we really need to play catch-up and get the infrastructure in place to match the expansion of housing in the south.

As I said, we will be doing that by upgrading and electrifying the railway line, putting on new trains and buying the corridor to extend the rail corridor down to Seaford and Aldinga. We are also spending over $12 million on the Victor Harbor/South Road intersection to make that a lot safer and a lot easier for people to get back to the city from the southern suburbs and the southern parts of Adelaide. I drove around Mount Compass yesterday and I was quite surprised to see the amount of housing going up there. People are moving further south. I think that we probably need to curtail that a little after these latest subdivisions come on line in the next few years and let the infrastructure catch up for a while.

We need to take a breath, and the only way we can do that is to continue with the urban infill that we are seeing in the western suburbs and develop some expansion and infill in the northern suburbs. We do not want to sit back in 20 or 30 years and say, 'Gee, a wine from McLaren Vale, that's pretty funny.' It would be like seeing a wine from Glenelg. These days you would think, 'Fancy having vineyards at Glenelg.' We need to make sure that we do not allow housing to be built on those beautiful vineyards and on that great agricultural land that we have around places such as Blewitt Springs, McLaren Vale, Willunga and McLaren Flat.

We need to have a very sensible approach to development in the area, and, as I said, keep that pristine look and feel for one of the great wine regions of the world, which, of course, is only 45 minutes from the CBD and an international airport.

We continued with the SA Great tour. From the Clipsal site we went to the Cheltenham racecourse site, which has been sold off and which will also provide housing. There will be 1,200 new homes in a park-like setting with a minimum of 15 per cent affordable housing. The 49 hectare site will be developed together with the adjacent 15 hectare Actil site and will be beneficial to the wider western suburbs community because of its parklands and accessibility. All the new homes will be required to install plumbed rainwater tanks and solar hot water supply and achieve a five-star energy rating as part of the government's sustainability policy.

Of the 49 hectare racecourse site, 17.1 hectares (or 35 per cent of the site) will be open space, which will incorporate wetlands and an aquifer storage and recovery system, as well as open space for active and passive recreation. The Land Management Corporation, on behalf of the government, is working with the City of Charles Sturt and the developer to prepare concept plans and to undertake the design of the wetlands and the ASR.

This is an example of the government being out there and listening to local communities. There was obviously a lot of concern that open space would be lost as part of the housing development on the site. So, the government did listen, and the amount of open space is far above the minimum requirement with respect to any other development around this state. Again, it just shows that the Rann government is prepared to go out there and listen to what the community has to say and to develop in accordance with the community's wishes.

Again, the Cheltenham site is on a major railway line that is already there, so we do not have to build the new infrastructure to get people into the city. We will be electrifying that line, and there will be great improvements in the Port Adelaide area. There will also be a light rail system that will go to Semaphore, and another one to West Lakes.

That is not being built just to take people to the football, because that would not make sense: there are only 22 home and away games there each year. So, you would not build a light rail system just to take people to the football. What we will see around Football Park at West Lakes is further development of a transport-oriented development, again, with some sort of medium and high-density housing. So, coupled with what has been happening at Cheltenham and what will eventually happen on the Clipsal site, that will provide a lot of new housing for people right next to excellent state-of-the-art transport systems.

We know that, if people live next to a transport system, they will use that rather than use their car and fight congestion on the roads and battle for a parking space in town. As I said earlier, the development that we undertake in the west and the north will be a saving grace for the southern suburbs and our great agricultural areas in the southern parts of the electorate of Mawson and the northern parts of Finniss.

The Newport Quays development at Port Adelaide is another place that is really coming together. I had not visited the Port for a few months, and every time I go there it surprises me how many more houses have been built. I think they are doing a very good job of blending the great heritage of Port Adelaide with these new modern buildings.

It is one of the last major waterfront developments in Australia and, with the new housing going up there and the prices they are getting, obviously, it is very popular with investors. I know that a lot of the people who are moving into Newport Quays at Port Adelaide are coming from nearby suburbs such as West Lakes. The Newport Quays site at Port Adelaide will be another place where people will have great access to public transport—and what a great lifestyle, living on the water down there at Port Adelaide.

Of course, there will be plenty of people to move into all these homes because, on the SA Great bus tour last week, we also went to Techport, the maritime defence precinct that resulted from the $6 billion air warfare destroyer contract. The Rann government has invested nearly $400 million into Techport Australia at Osborne, including common user ship building facilities, a maritime school centre and the air warfare destroyer system centre, and a dedicated supplier precinct is being built around the Techport facility. So, when one sees the cranes putting the buildings into place and the work that is being undertaken already ahead of the air warfare destroyer build, one sees that it will be a fantastic thing for the state.

As a result of this win, 4,000 direct and indirect jobs will be created. I remind people in this place that it was the Premier who went into bat against every other state in Australia except Tasmania. We beat Western Australia, Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales. It was a very tough competition to win that contract but what an important contract it is—4,000 jobs directly and indirectly related to this one contract. Of course, we will be bidding for further contracts in the upcoming years and, hopefully, we can win them, which will mean not only more jobs in whatever those projects will be but also jobs in industries which we are seeing popping up now which provide support, equipment and components for the air warfare destroyer.

From the Techport facility, the SA Great trip crossed the new bridge at Port Adelaide, the Diver Derek Bridge. We also saw the rail bridge. They are both opening bridges which connect Outer Harbor, that great port which we deepened to 14.2 metres only a couple of years ago. I remind the parliament that Victoria is still trying to come to grips with ways of deepening its own port. I know someone in politics over there called South Australia a backwater, but I point out to them that we were able to deepen our port to 14.2 metres to cater for the big international ships which call into places such as Sydney, Melbourne, Fremantle and Port Adelaide with a minimum of fuss and with a very generous contribution from the state government and also some money from Flinders Port (the private sector), and that we do know how to get on with the job in South Australia and build the sort of infrastructure that really backs up our wonderful industries because we want to see our exports grow and we want to do whatever we can to support industry in this state.

We travelled along the Port River Expressway. I did point out on the bus that, when we first came to government in 2002, the people who had won the contract for the Port River Expressway came to us a little confused because the previous government—the government that brought us the one way Southern Expressway and other great disasters—had planned for the Port River Expressway to have two sets of traffic lights and a railway crossing on it. Apparently that was the bid which could fit within the quote that the transport minister at the time could get up in cabinet. It was a pretty crazy idea to think that you could have an expressway with traffic lights and a railway crossing. I know that, when the winning bidders came to us with that problem, it was taken back to the cabinet of the newly formed Rann government and the traffic lights and the railway crossing were removed. Now there is a seamless run from Outer Harbor, across the bridges and up to the Salisbury Highway.

Of course, the Northern Expressway (which will be the biggest road infrastructure built in South Australia since the 1960s) is under plan as well. That will all work towards helping our industries get their products to port in a much quicker and more efficient way. Of course, that saves on things such as fuel and helps the environment, as well. We had lunch at the RAAF Edinburgh base. We looked at the huge development which is happening at the site. When you drive around the base, much of it is pretty much how it was when it was built in the 1940s as a strategic part of Australia's defence system. We are about to be welcoming an army regiment, and again we will see hundreds more jobs and we will need more and more housing. We were taken past a few sites where these housing developments will be constructed to cater not only for the extra workers and members of the regiment but also other workers related to the mining and defence sectors.

We finished our tour at Mawson Lakes and looked around that development. People on the bus had heard that things were happening in South Australia as our economy continues to grow, but it was another thing for them to visit all these places in one bus trip and to hear about the developments which are on the drawing board and to see the developments which are underway and the developments which have been completed not only in terms of land releases and home building but also in terms of the industrial estates which are popping up around the place, as well as the logistical centres and intermodal properties which were on the drawing board only a couple of years ago. To people who say this is a do-nothing state, I urge them to open their eyes and get out and see some of the development that is happening all around this great state.

Last month I took a bus load of students from the southern suburbs of Adelaide to Roxby Downs. With the blessing of the Speaker, I used my parliamentary travel allowance to do that. To show these years 11 and 12 students the mining boom first-hand was a wonderful experience. It was really good because, again, we can tell people about the mining boom, but seeing really is believing. I think these kids had a fantastic experience, and I kept explaining to them that they did not necessarily have to move to the north of the state to get a job. In fact, for every one job in the mining sector, there are another five, six or seven jobs related to that in other parts of the state, including the southern suburbs.

Last week, as a follow-up to that trip, we heard from a couple of local businesses from the southern suburbs, Dinki Di Engineering and Austral Yachts. Dinki Di makes the castings for the drilling company which does all the drilling at Roxby Downs and other mine sites around our state. Austral Yachts now has a new name and makes fibreglass boxes used predominantly in the mining industry. Those are just two companies in the southern suburbs, and there are many more great success stories of small and medium size businesses in the south where there are opportunities for our school leavers to get jobs relating to the mining industry. I keep emphasising to the young people I meet that there is a huge gap between the skills that we need and the skills that people are getting at school, so when they are in years 9 and 10 they should start looking at where the big demand is and start focusing their education towards that goal.

I was very pleased the other day to hear from the Minister for Employment, Training and Further Education that the take-up of our skills training in South Australia is three times that of other states, and I commend the government for the work it has done in returning trade schools to our secondary schools in South Australia. It should never have been allowed to go the way it did, where the trade schools were either closed down or the trade sectors of our schools allowed to disappear, and we are paying the price now because we need skilled people with a range of different trades. We are crying out for them. It is not too late, but there is a lot of work to be done very quickly. I commend the government for the work that it is doing in that area.

I think one of the other great wins that we have had this year as a government (it did not receive a lot of publicity and I know it divides people on both sides of this house) was the continuing ban on GM crops. I am a strong believer that we should do our best to protect places such as Willunga and McLaren Vale where we have a great clean and green organic image for our produce. I know that Victoria and New South Wales lifted their bans on GM crops at the end of last year and the beginning of this year, and there was a lot of pressure for South Australia to follow suit. I was very proud of this government when it said it would continue the ban until further research is done.

I grew up on a farm, and we did a lot of different things with breeding and ways to improve milk production and things like that, but I think there is a difference between breeding animals and growing grain and mutating genes in plants. I think, while there is still research to come to show what the risks are, it is best for us as a government to play it a little cautiously.

I am quite surprised at the number of students in schools with allergies to nuts. I do not know whether there is a correlation between GM food and nut allergies but, as far as I know, when I was at school there were no kids with nut allergies, and now they number in the dozens. There are lots of other allergies and things such as that from which our children are suffering and I do not know whether or not it is related to GM food, but I think it would be dangerous for us as a government to allow GM crops to be grown in South Australia before we get a little more research done. That research should not be done by the major chemical and pesticide companies that keep trying to persuade governments around the world to go to GM crops.

Of course, it is in their interest to have GM crops resistant to the poisons they are selling for use in the agricultural sector. In the UK and other parts of Europe there is a real turn-off towards GM products. It may be that we have nipped it in the bud and saved our reputation on the international stage. We have great produce here. We have a fantastic agricultural sector—one that has had it very tough in recent years with drought and other conditions beyond the control of farmers. We need to protect that image.

Once again, I congratulate the government for maintaining the ban on GM crops. It is a hard one. One cannot put the genie back in the bottle, but it would be great to come up with a way in which to label GM foods that are on sale. I know it is very hard because, as the minister has explained before, nearly everything we buy has a trace of GM food in it. It is hard to control the food chain, but maybe one day in the future it is something on which we could work together as a society to ensure the health of everyone in this state and the reputation of our agricultural sector in South Australia. I commend the Governor and thank His Excellency for his wonderful speech.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Goldsworthy.


At 17:53 the house adjourned until 24 September 2008 at 11:00.


PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT