HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-05-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

RAIL ELECTRIFICATION

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite—Leader of the Opposition) (14:51): My question is to the Premier. Why did he, on ABC Radio on 29 January, talk down—scotch, if you like—the prospects of electrifying the rail system, saying it was too expensive? What is the total cost of modernisation and electrification of the Noarlunga line from Adelaide to Noarlunga, including the extension to Seaford, and what component will be paid by the state taxpayer? On 29 January 2008—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: You have led with it. On 29 January 2008, on ABC Radio, this was said, and I am quite happy to provide it to the minister:

Premier Mike Rann says there isn't the money to electrify Adelaide's public train system and says the Libs have already made a range of promises they can't afford to keep.

The Liberal Party had called for the electrification of rail. The direct quote from the Premier at 6am was:

I'd love to be able to electrify the railways and do a whole range of things but ultimately the people of South Australia are going to say how are you going to pay for it...

In the 2008-09 budget, and just a few months later, the government allotted $5 million to the Noarlunga line modernisation from Adelaide to Noarlunga. Yesterday's federal budget allotted—

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: I have a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the member for MacKillop! The Minister for Transport.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Have you noticed how he has gone from total collapse to frantic desperation? I am sorry, sir, but that's ridiculous.

The SPEAKER: Order! I think he has finished his explanation. Let us hear the answer. The Deputy Premier.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: I have a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition just yelled across the chamber that I lied this morning. I would ask him to withdraw and apologise.

The SPEAKER: If the leader said that, he must withdraw.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: I don't know what came over me, sir. I apologise and withdraw.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The Minister for Transport.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy) (14:54): I am more than happy to answer the question. In fact, I have here the quote he refers to from the Premier. It is:

I'd love to be able to electrify the railways and do a whole range of things but ultimately the people of South Australia are going to say how are you going to pay for it...

The only way the Libs can pay—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: He has had his go and that was the best shot in his locker. Can I say that on 29 January 2008 a few things had already happened as a government. I will come to the Premier's comments in a moment—because the money was not available then. It was not available until the budget, was it, Kevin? That is what you do.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Let me say this. I will go back over it again. In 2005 we had the State Strategic Plan and we commissioned a feasibility study. We said that if we do rail revitalisation and resleepering this will lead to electrification. It went to the Public Works Committee and we told them it was a step towards electrification. I think I understand what 'scotching it down' means. That, to me, if it were capable of having an opposite of scotching it down, would be the opposite. It went to Public Works but we are scotching it up. We have been scotching it up for years. Whoever wrote that question was scotching it up. It is a nonsense.

The Premier in January knew a little more about the government's plans than the Leader of the Opposition did. He knew what was going on. The truth is that until a budget is brought down the matter is not funded. That was January. Five months later, from memory, we brought down the budget.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Five months later we brought down a budget with the greatest ever investment in public transport and in rail in the history of the state. Almost one year later, as a result of doing the work properly, we have the commonwealth government as a partner in the revitalisation of rail services—something that has never happened before.

Mr Hamilton-Smith: Pork barrelling.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Pork barrelling, he says. Of course, that is what we asked for from the commonwealth. The Leader of the Opposition, too, asked for things. I remember the rather incoherent letter he sent off as a submission.

The Hon. K.O. Foley: I have it here.

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Have you got it there? What did they want? They wanted a duplication of a road that they should have duplicated in the first place. They wanted them to pay for a sports stadium and they wanted them to pay for one of the three options on rebuilding the RAH—except they do not yet know what it is. Infrastructure Australia did not take a long time to deal with that, did they? They said, 'Send us money and we will tell you what it is for later.'

The bottom line is that what happened yesterday and what has happened today and what we are talking about today is a commonwealth contribution to a state in a manner that has never occurred before. It happened because when the federal government was first elected we sat—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the member for MacKillop!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: Now Mitch says that South Australia got less than its share. Apparently, this morning the Leader of the Opposition said that we got bailed out. This morning we got bailed out and this afternoon we got less than our share.

An honourable member: Which is it?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: It is both.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.F. CONLON: It is absolutely plain who planned for and who paid for the electrification of rail in South Australia, and who won commonwealth support. That is absolutely plain. Also, what is plain is that there is a choice at the next election between a government that has achieved things that have never before been achieved and a rabble that will send letters that are ungrammatical to the commonwealth government asking for billions of dollars, who will say one thing in the morning and a different thing in the afternoon, and, above all, who will engage regularly in failures of honesty. There is a pretty clear choice at the next election.

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