HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-07-16 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN TIME ZONE

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (12:34): I move:

That this house—

(a) notes the original designated time zone for South Australia is nine hours in advance of Coordinated Universal Time; and

(b) supports the shift of South Australian Time zone to nine hours in advance of Coordinated Universal Time, putting South Australia a full hour behind the Eastern States and a full hour in front of Western Australia.

It makes sense to maximise our use of the sunlight available to us. All over the world, it is done by matching the clocks to the sun. Australia's pioneers were not fools when they had three equal time zones across Australia, all one hour apart.

Originally in South Australia, our true time zone was also referred to as Meridian Time, which was established by an act of parliament in 1894. The act was entitled, 'An Act to Establish a Standard of Time in South Australia', and established our time as the 135th meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, which, for those like me who like things explained in simple terms, means that our mean time passed through the mid region of South Australia. This gave us three equal time zones across Australia, each one hour apart, as it is with most other countries in the world.

However, just prior to Federation in 1898, this parliament repealed the 1894 act and shifted our time zone 30 minutes to the east to a point outside of South Australia's borders in the vicinity of Warrnambool in Victoria, thinking that a uniform time zone for central and eastern Australia might be beneficial. The initial proposal was to adjust both our central time zone and the eastern time zone of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland. The eastern time zone was to be shifted west, while, for central Australia, we would shift ours east. We met our commitment in setting ours on that common meridian, but they did not. The other states did not; they pulled out, presumably because they understood the disadvantage of moving their time zone out of kilter with the sun.

This leaves South Australia not as it should be: nine hours ahead of Greenwich mean time, but, rather, 9½ hours ahead. In consequence, our whole state works to a time zone fixed by a longitude east of our state borders, which is quite ridiculous. Effectively, while there is little effect on our eastern borders, Adelaide enjoys a year-round daylight saving of half an hour. As we travel west this effect is compounded, some areas being 60 to 90 minutes permanently behind the 'sun time'. You only have to go to Ceduna or Streaky Bay, and these areas, to see that children get up for school in the dark and go to bed in the evening in the daylight, which is quite nonsensical.

Mr Kenyon interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Piccolo): The member for Schubert will continue with his remarks.

Mr VENNING: I just note the interjections by the member. I am not making fun of this; I think it is quite serious. I just cannot understand how this can happen, when children have to get up in the dark, an hour and a half before the sun comes up in some cases, and come home and try to get to sleep in the daylight.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: I get up in the dark now.

Mr VENNING: I know you do, but this is children. In this case, why can't the education department allow those schools to open at, say, 10 o'clock? They do not seem to want to do that. So we have these poor little kids getting on buses in the dark and going off to school. Effectively, there is little effect on the eastern borders, and Adelaide, as I said, enjoys a half-hour daylight saving, but surely we have to consider these young people, who live on the far West Coast, who have to put up with the extremes of our current time zone: they have to get up for school in the dark and go to bed in daylight.

Some influential groups would like to see our time zone shifted a further 30 minutes to the east, so that it and the eastern seaboard time zone coincide and we have only one—but on their meridian, not ours; again, the poor cousins. Some businesses claim that our economy would be better served by sharing a time zone with Sydney and Melbourne, yet have no difficulty at all in providing call centres from India—and we have all experienced that, more and more everyday—which is about four hours behind Eastern Standard Time.

By shifting to true Central Standard Time it will be possible to better utilise shared national resources; that is, peak demand for electricity in South Australia will be further displaced from the needs of the Eastern States. If we line up our time to the Eastern States so that peak power demand occurs coincidentally between central and eastern Australia, using our present infrastructure, the result would be a disaster. It would therefore be necessary to build new infrastructure solely to cope with peak load. This would be an inefficient use of national resource capacity.

It is a nonsense to contend that Australia would be better off with two time zones, especially since, for the summer months, Queensland manages, without economic detriment, to run its time one hour behind its southern counterparts; so it makes a mockery of that argument. If we look at the experience overseas, we find that Brazil operates on three time zones, Canada on seven, the United States on five, Indonesia on three—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: And what about the Russian Federation?

Mr VENNING: —and the USSR on seven.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: There is no such thing as the USSR.

Mr VENNING: Well, Russia on seven.

The ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The member will continue uninterrupted.

Mr VENNING: Our reversion to a true Central Standard Time would result in our time zone being coincidental with the most populous parts of Indonesia, Japan and Korea. With the possibility of minimal boom, sharing a time zone with these countries might give South Australia the same and natural advantage that Western Australia has because it shares the time zone with most of China.

Making a virtue of difference, by positioning South Australia one hour behind the eastern seaboard and one hour in front of Western Australia, business opportunities may be created whereby South Australia might be ideally placed as the coordinating point for businesses that operate between the east and west coast.

Why, you may well ask, would I seek to take on groups such as the media and Business SA? The answer is quite simple. I am not a bureaucrat, I am not a lawyer; I have never pretended to be. I have earned my success from the land, and you earn nothing in primary production unless it is based on good science, practical common sense and hard work.

What is more, I believe that the South Australian electorate at large and, indeed, the majority of members in this house are quite capable of seeing past vested interests, rhetoric and spin to adopt a measure which not only shows common sense but which I will demonstrate is practical and in line with good science.

I hope that the house will see the wisdom of this motion and not perpetuate a mistake made by those who sat in this place over a century ago, and vote instead for common sense and a sustainable future. It is time for South Australia to put an end to this half an hour time lag. I believe that this is eminent common sense. We have time zones equal across the world. It is all very well for the city slickers, who like to knock off and have three or four hours of daylight in which to follow their leisure pursuits, but what about—

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I rise on a point of order. I am desperate to hear the member for Schubert's explanation on this, and I cannot for the interjections of the members for Norwood and Newland.

The ACTING SPEAKER: I warn the members on my right.

Mr VENNING: Thank you for your protection, sir, and, indeed, the minister. I believe—

Ms Ciccarello interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER: I warn the member for Norwood.

An honourable member interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER: Second warning, member for Norwood.

Mr VENNING: This is a first, sir. Do you feel the power coming to you?

The ACTING SPEAKER: Do you wish to continue your remarks?

Mr VENNING: I do. This is a motion—and I will say this in my final few words—that does not have unanimous support from my own side of politics.

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr VENNING: I do not know; it has not been gauged.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: It's about to be.

Mr VENNING: Not necessarily. I have constituents to whom I said I would introduce this meassure, and I have liaised with the shadow minister, the member for Morphett. Since the opinion piece under my name appeared in the Sunday Mail, I thought that I would be inundated with abuse and rhetoric from Business SA., but I have not heard a word. I did speak to Mr Vaughan about this matter and he just said, 'Well, you could be right.' But things have changed.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER: The Attorney-General!

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: Yes, I am here, sir—present.

Mr VENNING: We are getting very used to personal diatribe from the Attorney-General; that was personal. We are not going to go there again.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Schubert, are you finished?

Mr VENNING: No, I am not finished.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I rise on a point of order. The member for Schubert is trying to give an explanation on the divisions within his party. I want to hear them.

The ACTING SPEAKER: The member for Schubert is open to discuss the divisions within his party.

Mr VENNING: I want to round off—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

Mr VENNING: I did what was required. I want to round off what I am saying without being—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER: Attorney-General!

Mr VENNING: You know you are just taking up the time of the house. I want to say that, in the light of common sense, every other country in the world has equal time zones and surely, in equity and fairness, the people—adults and children—of Ceduna, Thevenard, Streaky Bay and all those far western communities are worthy of consideration in a matter like this.

Why should they have to live in a community where their clocks are out by half an hour? It would be bad enough living on an extreme if the meridian were in the middle of the state but, when it is east of the border, it is not fair or right. I ask the house to give this matter some consideration before it is debated again on, say, 10 September, and have another look at it. I gave a commitment to my constituents that I would raise this matter, and I have.

I say to people like the member for Giles, who represents Outback areas, that people are very much disadvantaged by having the clock set other than by the sun because they have to live by that. If we want to maximise electricity, power and light, we should be using the sun, rather than having a political idea of the time zone as it is. I ask the house to consider this motion and, hopefully, support it.

Mr KENYON (Newland) (12:45): I am rising to oppose the motion—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis: Well, that's typical!

Mr KENYON: —as will be the member for West Torrens in a moment's time. I think it is fair to acknowledge that some sections of the rural community do not support the current time zone arrangements in this state. To be fair to them, when you are a certain amount of time behind the time zone there will be some consequences. The member for Schubert has mentioned getting up in the dark, which is something that I do most days, and going to bed when it is light, which was imposed on me when I was a child, and I am only slightly warped, so I can understand that there are some inconveniences across the state.

However, the matter involves the whole state and, while some people may be inconvenienced, and that is unfortunate, we ask: what is the overall benefit to the entire state? The interesting thing is that the issue of South Australia's time zone was only recently before the parliament. In February this year, both houses, with the support of the opposition (including the member for Schubert) passed the Standard Time Act which, apart from the heritage destruction of Greenwich Mean Time, imposed Coordinated Universal Time and maintained our being 9.5 hours ahead of Coordinated Universal Time, and that includes the half an hour differential with the Eastern States, of course.

In relation to the motion that the time zone be only nine hours in advance of Coordinated Universal Time, there does not appear to be any significant community sentiment for changing the current arrangement wherein South Australia is only half an hour behind the Eastern States. I think it is fair to say that only a small section of the population supports the proposed move, and it is mainly those from the western areas of the state, and we have talked about them before.

Equally, there is a sector of the public that supports a move to the adoption of the Eastern States' time, so that there is just one time zone between the Eastern States and South Australia. That is mainly from the business community through Business SA. It would certainly have a lot of business benefit, and there is no doubt about that. The government considers that any shift would cause problems and possibly costs that are disruptive and unnecessary.

If we were to adopt the proposal of the member for Schubert, it would include a fourth time zone and, in summer, there would be an extra time zone because the Northern Territory is legislated to be half an hour behind the Eastern States. So, we would be at odds with the Northern Territory and the central time zone of Australia would actually have two time zones. An extra time zone does not do anything for business or for international visitors who may come to our country. An hour's difference in time zones could create additional problems in the Riverland and the South-East for people who regularly traverse the eastern border of the state.

Mr Venning: What about the cows?

Mr KENYON: And, of course, the cows. Cows have problems with time and always have for as long as I can remember. It is not just the telling of the time, member for Schubert, it is getting a wristwatch with a band that is big enough to fit around the hoof of the cow. It is not an easy thing for cows—but we will try to ignore that.

A lot of people in the eastern part of the state in the Riverland, and particularly in the South-East, are moving across the border into Victoria and back, and it would not make their life any easier at all.

The subject of the state's time zone has been widely debated, including by a parliamentary select committee inquiry, which reported in 1995. The current state government and former governments, after fully considering all the issues involved with moving to a different time zone, have decided that the current arrangement should be retained with South Australia remaining 30 minutes behind Eastern Standard Time.

In the motion, this house is asked to note that South Australia's original time zone was designated as nine hours ahead of what was then Greenwich Mean Time but is now Coordinated Universal Time. This designation lasted for only four years, with the current arrangements being enacted from 30 April 1899. I think the member for Schubert suggested that we had never kept up our end of the bargain, but apparently we have.

The government is not in favour of an arrangement whereby Eastern Standard Time is one hour ahead of the state's time and will not support the motion for the reasons I have mentioned. However, the government will continue to monitor community sentiment and the relative merits of various proposals in relation to time zones and continue to liaise with the rural communities in the west of the state regarding the impact of daylight saving. I will be opposing the bill.

Ms BREUER (Giles) (12:51): I was very interested to hear the member for Schubert and see his motion because I do understand what the issue is for the member for Schubert. Having an electorate that consists of virtually all the western side of the state, I acknowledge that this is an issue of importance to communities out there.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: You do; not him.

Ms BREUER: Yes, I have that electorate covering the western side of the state so I am constantly asked about this. Messages come through to the office regarding the issue of time and particularly daylight saving when that occurs, so I understand full well what the member for Schubert is trying to achieve with this motion. I must say that I took exception to my colleague from this side when he said 'for the good of the state' because, unfortunately for us out there in rural areas, we sacrifice everything for the good of the state so often, so when I hear statements like that, it does tend to make my blood boil.

Why should we in those areas have to conform to Adelaide for the good of the state? Why can't Adelaide conform with us for the good of our communities? It does make me a bit cross when I hear comments like that. I am sorry to my colleague; I am not having a go at him, but this is just a country thing that we feel. We are consistently told 'for the good of the state' to conform with what Adelaide decides for us.

I do have some understanding of what the member for Schubert is on about and I know that one of the issues, particularly for young children, is school buses and having to be collected very early in the morning. It is still dark, and it is freezing cold. I am not a morning person and I will not get out of bed while it is still dark unless I absolutely have to but, for those young children, it is a real issue and an imposition for them.

I will point out one of the things that I cannot understand regarding this matter—and I have talked to people out in those areas about this; rather than trying to get rid of daylight saving or trying to change the time zone, etc., particularly in relation to those rural schools with school buses, for instance, why can't they start school an hour later? I believe that there are certain standard times for schools that they need to conform to, but you do not have to start school at 8.30 or 9am. Surely, if you have a number of young children, you could look at starting school later in the day. It is not going to matter very much to your community if you start at 9 o'clock or 9.30 and fit in with that.

That has always been an issue for me. Why do we need to stop daylight saving, which I absolutely support and love? I think daylight saving is fantastic. Why would we stop that because a few children have problems in the morning? I cannot understand why the schools cannot look at actually changing their time and why even some of the communities cannot consider changing their times and how they operate in some ways. Why can't this matter be sorted out locally?

Some people hate daylight saving, and the issue surfaces every year. As I said, I love daylight saving and I think most people do. Perhaps the older population have some issues with it but we have lived with it now for 30-odd years, and I cannot imagine life without it. I would like to see it perhaps all year round. I think we have to ignore anyone who hates daylight saving and complains about it, and just get on with it. The great majority of people out there are not complaining about daylight saving: they are complaining because they do find the early morning very difficult for them.

I understand what the member for Schubert is saying, and in some ways I support him. I would actually support this motion, but I am very nervous about supporting it at this stage without a lot more information, because I understand the implications that supporting this motion could have on the state, on businesses and, indeed, on lives.

I see a lot of merit in what the member for Schubert says, and I will certainly be following this up a lot more, because I really want to speak out for the people in my area. However, I need a lot more information at this stage before I can support this motion. I think what I might do is sit down at some stage with the member for Schubert and perhaps the member for Stuart, and we can have a look at this and try to nut out something and see what we can come up with. Well done, member for Schubert. I am sorry that I cannot support you, but maybe in the future I will.

Motion negatived.

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