House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-04-08 Daily Xml

Contents

FLEET SA

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (14:59): My question is to the Treasurer. Has he now checked the facts provided yesterday to the house in confirming that the increased state fleet car purchases over the short term to help General Motors Holden would actually cost $45 million? The Treasurer's statement to the house yesterday conflicts with the information provided by minister Wright on 8 June 2005 when that minister said that increasing vehicle turnover to three years and 60,000 kilometres would save $3.4 million per year by 2008-09. Surely, reversing that policy would have the same effect in dollar terms.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Treasurer, Minister for Industry and Trade, Minister for Federal/State Relations) (15:00): The member for Goyder, the shadow finance minister, is correct: there would be a saving in the order of some $3.5 million plus per year in operating costs; however, there is a capital cost. The $3.6 million is operating savings. If you turn your cars over every 30,000 kilometres, as against every 60,000 kilometres, I am advised by Treasury that that involves up to 1,500 vehicles per year, and it builds up over a couple of years. If you assume a capital cost of roughly $30,000 for a vehicle, that is an annual capital cost of $45 million.

Mr Hamilton-Smith interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Now he is saying yes.

Mr Hamilton-Smith interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Yes, but you are saying—

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: It a $45 million per year—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the Minister for Correctional Services!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I am advised that the Liberal Party policy of, effectively, doubling the rate of purchase would add an extra 1,500 vehicles per year being purchased by government, at an average cost of $30,000 per vehicle, which equals an additional cost per year capex of $45 million. They got it half wrong yesterday, and that it is why I—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Well, think of this—

Mr Hamilton-Smith: Fiddling the books again.

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Mr Speaker, I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw that comment. The comment was that I am fiddling the books again. That is an outrageous reflection on me as Treasurer.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will withdraw that remark.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: Mr Speaker, as I understand it, that is not an unparliamentary remark.

The SPEAKER: 'Fiddling the books' is a reflection on the Treasurer. 'Fiddling the books' is an allegation of corruption, and I direct the leader to withdraw.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: All right, well, that is your direction, Mr Speaker. I note the precedent you have now set and I withdraw the remark.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: That is a reflection on you, sir. I would leap to your defence. I am advised by Treasury that the Leader of the Opposition's policy on the run, off the top of his head, commits the state to a $45 million capex expenditure per annum. Just imagine what happens when the government sells the cars every two years. What do you think would happen to the second-hand car market for Holden Commodores in this state if, all of a sudden, we were flooding the market with cars that have only 30,000 kilometres on the dial? I assume you would actually significantly undermine the value of second-hand vehicles quite substantially and, in the process, probably do a lot more damage to General Motors Holden than you would benefit General Motors Holden.

I began this question time by suggesting that the leader should relinquish Treasury and give it to the member for Goyder (he probably should give it to the member for Davenport, who I think is the most capable of all shadow ministers in this place by a country mile) because you did not do your homework. You really have to try harder and do your homework. Perhaps you are not yet ready for that elevation.