HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-06-23 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

APPROPRIATION BILL

Adjourned debate on motion to note grievances.

(Continued from 22 June 2011.)

The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (16:01): It is with some pleasure that I get the opportunity to speak on the grievance debate in relation to the Appropriation Bill. During my time in this place I have traditionally always used the grievance debate of the appropriation to talk about the impact of the budget on my electorate of Davenport.

I have spent some time examining the thousands of pages of the budget and I have found one line of good news for the Davenport electorate; that is, after many years of lobbying, the Eden Hills Primary School is going to get a $2.9 million upgrade over the next year or two. That is excellent news for the school community which has done a great job on a very small site. It is a small school in number. It is at capacity because of its popularity, and it really is a good outcome for the Eden Hills community that they will finally get some more upgrades to their facilities on the school site.

Just up the road, I hope the government keeps to its word to fund an upgrade at the Eden Hills CFS station. This was first promised at their 50th birthday in 2001, and I went to the 60th birthday celebrations recently and was very pleased to hear the new chief officer re-announce that they are going to get a station upgrade. So, the Eden Hills CFS has had the unique experience of having a station upgrade announced in its 50th year, which never occurred because of the election intervening, and then the re-announcement of that policy occurring now in 2011-12 and 2012-13.

The Eden Hills CFS Brigade is a wonderful group of people. They are one of the longest serving CFS brigades in the Mitcham Hills. They are a very tight-knit family group. The partners of the volunteers, and family members of the volunteers, put up with a lot. They have a high callout rate in a very high-risk bushfire zone. Eden Hills is situated on the top of a number of valleys which face north, and they are aware that on a catastrophic fire day their community is very much in the firing line. I am hoping that after 10 years of neglect this government can finally keep its word and deliver on that promise as outlined in the budget.

There are other issues in the electorate of Davenport which we have been lobbying for for a number of years that the government simply ignores. One is the need for more car parking at all the railway stations along the Belair line that service my electorate, but, in particular, the Eden Hills station, which has very limited car parking.

The sad part about it is that there is actually a block of land that is for sale. It is owned by the Australian Rail Track Corporation, which has indicated that it is willing to sell it to the government. It has even nominated a reasonable price. The government simply will not buy the land and convert it into car parks, which does seem a little unusual for a government that is out there talking about public transport, although I note that the Belair line is not being electrified.

Other members have spoken about this issue. The member for Torrens in her speech yesterday talked about the money that is going to her electorate for public transport and park-and-rides. The member for Light mentioned an amount of money being spent in his electorate. It simply will not invest in Davenport in the Mitcham Hills. That is the brutal reality of it. This government is ignoring a very simple solution to a very complex problem.

It is on a windy, steep piece of road. They are narrow Hills roads. There is no parking on the roads without creating even more danger. The government says that it wants to increase passenger transport patronage, but it will not increase the car parking facilities at those sites. It is not as if the land is not available. Representatives of the Australian Rail Track Corporation met us on site. They walked around it, and said that they were happy to sell it. They even wrote saying that they were happy to sell it. I have forwarded that to the minister a number of times. So, it is unfortunate that the government will not do that.

The other issue, of course, that goes hand in hand with that problem is the increasing traffic down Old Belair Road, Unley Road and Fullarton Road out of the Mitcham Hills. This is primarily a result of the increase in housing development at Blackwood Park. That should be no surprise to this government given that the development of Blackwood Park was snuck through by the Bannon/Arnold government in its dying days. The Liberal Party when in government allocated around $2 million to start addressing the traffic issues to do with the Old Belair Road, James Road and the Blackwood main street.

The first thing that this government did was come in and take what was left of that money, which was around $900,000, and stopped the project. It actually took money out of the electorate because it did not want to fix the roads. As I have said to the house before, and I will say it again, the road capacity in the Mitcham Hills will not stand an evacuation when there is a fire. Every summer I am concerned about a bad fire and the capacity to evacuate.

The simple facts are that Old Belair Road, James Road and Belair Road will not carry the traffic in the event of a fire. I always invite members of the government to come and do a tour with me if they want to have a look at that particular issue. One now senior cabinet minister has done that, to his credit, and understands and shares my concern, I suspect. But the government is investing nothing at all in the road infrastructure there, and there is no plan that I can establish as to what to do on those very bad catastrophic days.

In relation to other road infrastructure, the member for Fisher raises the fact that there is land for sale—or about to come on to the market—adjacent to Flagstaff Road. I would support his call to the government to look at buying that land. Even if it does not build on it straightaway, Flagstaff Road is one of the reversible roads, and there are always close calls on that road.

The community of Flagstaff Hill, Flagstaff Pines, Craigburn Farm and Craigburn who use those particular roads would certainly support some forward planning by preserving that particular road, and, if the budget allows, some construction there to make it a proper two lanes in/two lanes out scenario, rather than a reversible road. The other issues are not new to the government. The need for another pedestrian crossing on the Blackwood main street has been well known to the government for many years and, again, the government turned a blind eye to that.

This is a not a government that governs for all South Australians as the Premier promised in his election night speech and victory. This is a government that governs for mates, and the simple fact is that if you are not a government mate they simply will not invest in a project that will benefit you. This is a government that certainly deals only with its mates.

With those few words, I am at least gracious enough to give the government credit that, after many, many years, we received some investment at last in the Eden Hills Primary School.

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (16:10): The 2011-12 budget presents opportunities for further progress in the Florey electorate. In education, The Heights School, recently given national prominence to showcase its impressive site and curriculum when hosting a visit from the federal community cabinet, will see an injection of funding of $1.9 million to facilitate stage 3 of their redevelopment of existing middle school facilities.

There are many great schools in the electorate of Florey, and the BER funding has been well utilised in conjunction with state funding to deliver campus upgrades to a level not seen for many years. Students are reaping the rewards and, wherever they are on their path of lifelong learning, it is obvious the impact surroundings have on learning. In support of our wonderful teachers and ancillary staff, new initiatives will also foster a culture of learning. In particular, the recent announcement that 700 contract teachers will be offered permanent contracts is welcome, and other measures to strengthen local autonomy will show dividends in time.

In health, Modbury Hospital remains the hub of acute health care in our area. Over the past few years, following the return of the hospital's management to the state, we have seen many improvements. In this year's budget, we will see $22 million of expenditure, with the Accident and Emergency Department being earmarked for long-anticipated refurbishment. We will also see a new rehab and therapy centre. Staffing issues will continue to be addressed, and it would be very welcome if the knockers, who with their contrived comments continuing to erode the confidence of the community in their hospital, recognised the government's commitment to ensuring that Modbury Hospital remains a vital part of the state's health system.

The facts speak for themselves, and the Modbury Hospital will benefit from continuing improvements in the years to come. The dedicated staff deliver the best possible health care and, on behalf of the community, I extend to them our sincere thanks for their continuing commitment. They and their work are greatly appreciated. Parking at the hospital remains an issue of concern, and I will continue to work with the responsible departments to ensure that ample capacity is eventually reached and that those with special circumstances are not disadvantaged.

In another major health initiative, extra spending of $19.3 million over four years will ensure that 23,000 more women can be screened for breast cancer. It will be good to see the early intervention that these mammograms will provide in the hope of detecting life-threatening cancers in as many as an estimated 340 cases. At the Modbury GP Plus super clinic, proposed construction expenditure over the 2011-12 period is over $7.4 million. Doctors are already in place, and local advertising is advising that the centre is open and ready for business. These new doctors will relieve the pressure on other local practices no longer able to take new clients. In addition, the ancillary health professionals will be building up their patient services and lists.

In disability, this budget delivers extra spending of $37.5 million over four years to help meet the needs of South Australians living with a disability and to support their carers. The need is great, and this major commitment will go some way to ease the burden, along with a further $10.8 million over the next four years for much-needed equipment.

In transport, the O-Bahn, our public transport link in the north-east, will see proposed expenditure of over $6 million in the 2011-12 year for upgrades to the Klemzig and Modbury interchanges to improve passenger amenity and safety and, of course, parking at the popular park-and-rides. This will go some way to address the pressure on parking in the Modbury Central area and will be part of the solution I seek to address, for it remains an issue of concern to local residents. In conjunction with the member for Newland, I will continue to lobby and keep the O-Bahn the jewel in the crown of the Adelaide public transport system.

An honourable member interjecting:

Ms BEDFORD: Yes, but I am working with him. I can work with you, too. I call on local government representatives to work with state government to ensure the best outcome. Local planning issues from long ago are in part responsible for the parking dilemma, and with Tea Tree Plaza drawing large numbers of people to Smart Road, along with the hospital and O-Bahn and other adjacent retail outlets and services, such as Centrelink, SA Housing and financial institutions, it will be necessary to be visionary to ensure that the next 30 years are better for pedestrian and vehicular movements. The current shocking road toll reminds us all to be patient and courteous on the roads.

For families, a highlight for the most vulnerable in the community is extra spending of $69.1 million over the next four years to boost the state's child protection system. I would also like to put on the record the thanks of the community for the work these departments do. They provide help to families in need.

Before closing, it is important to acknowledge the contribution of volunteers in our community. The recent concert at Festival Theatre, most ably MC'd by Peter Goers, himself a volunteer of renown, celebrated the work of our unsung heroes—those able to spend time making life better for others. In particular, I acknowledge the International Women's Group operating from the Modbury Uniting Church. Pat Thomas, Wendy Sinnott and a hardy band of volunteers have worked for many years to ensure that the experience of many new settlers in our country, and particularly in our area, is made as easy as possible, with classes and interaction with other service providers in the area helping to make them feel much more at home much more quickly.

These brief remarks, while obviously not addressing every budget measure, concern those measures with a positive impact on the Florey electorate. Community counts, and my job is to advocate for my electorate. This budget has addressed some very important matters I have raised with ministers, and it is good to make this progress. I look forward to seeking additional opportunities to provide extra services in my area. I remain as committed as ever to highlighting whenever possible new ways to improve the wellbeing and lives of my constituents.

Mr MARSHALL (Norwood) (16:16): The 2010-11 budget has now been delivered. The response from the public, the media and the analysts reminds me of the final lines of that famous T.S. Eliot poem, The Hollow Men, 'This is the way the world ends: not with a bang but a whimper.' What a huge disappointment this budget has turned out to be. If ever there was an expectation for setting a new course for South Australia, it was at this point of the budget, and the Treasurer has failed at the very first hurdle.

The previous budget, which was only brought down nine months earlier, was universally condemned, not only by the opposition but also, importantly, by the PSU and the Labor Party faithful. The treasurer at the time said that the September 2010 budget was passed unanimously—

Ms Thompson: PSA, not PSU.

Mr MARSHALL: PSA, sorry. The treasurer at the time said that the September 2010 budget was passed unanimously by cabinet. He did not want to be held responsible for this budget, so he put his arms around his friends in caucus and his friends in the cabinet and, very interestingly, he brought his friend in, the member for Cheltenham, and said that they were lock step with all the toxic measures in that September 2010 budget.

In fact, in this very house he suggested to us that he had received a standing ovation for that budget, and I think he pointed out that there was probably going to be a public move to establish a statue in his honour for the wonderful work that he had recently done as treasurer. In reality, the budget was completely and utterly toxic: it cost the former treasurer his job and it sent the Labor performance in the opinion polls into a tailspin, which it is yet to recover from, but it cost the people of South Australia much, much more.

What did the new Treasurer deliver in response to this public condemnation of the September 2010 budget? He essentially delivered precisely the same budget. Although, he did repackage it. This time it was in soft blues. There were some beautiful photographs of hard-working South Australians adorning the pages. In fact, he even put a photograph of his poor, unsuspecting family in there to try to take us off the scent of the real deceit that is in this budget. Fundamentally, he let down every single South Australian, the people whose photographs adorn the pages of this budget.

This budget confirms the deception of the September 2010 budget, the deception that saw the Rann government go to the election campaign promising savings of $750 million, to be implemented by the Sustainable Budget Commission across the forward estimates, with actual savings in revenue measures in excess of $2.5 billion, which was a deception on the people of South Australia. That budget, like this budget, was a budget of deceit. This budget is a budget of debt and deficit and, most importantly, it is a budget of wasted opportunity. That is the order I will follow for the remainder of my address here today.

Let's start with debt. The Treasurer is fond of using the number '$4.2 billion' when he talks about net debt. This fits in with the theme of deception. Yes, it is true that there is the net debt of $4.2 billion but this is not the total picture. When we look at the whole-of-government debt, last year debt was projected in the forward estimates to be $7.5 billion. It has now blown out to $8.2 billion. This is the whole-of-government debt when you talk about the debt of all the government enterprises: SA Water, ForestrySA, etc.

That $8.2 billion is after the sale of the forests and the lotteries. We are absolutely dripping in debt. If we scrape the surface a bit further and we look at the total picture of liabilities that exist in this state at the moment the total picture is something like $20 billion when you include our unfunded liability with regards to WorkCover, the Motor Accident Commission and public servant superannuation entitlements. That is the true picture.

This Treasurer would like to talk in simplistic terms about credit cards, '$4.2 billion is not a lot of money. It is like the average person having a $26,000 debt.' Let me tell you what it is like: it is like a household having a debt on its Visa card but forgetting to tell anybody about what is on their Bankcard, their Diner's card or their American Express card. It is about time the Treasurer came clean with the people of South Australia and told them of the total amount of debt which is currently a liability here in South Australia.

The second point is, of course, the deficit. The Treasurer made much of comparing the state budget with his home finances. Continually, he said, 'Look, we won't be borrowing money to fund our operating expenses. We won't be racking up the debt on our credit card.' In 2008-09 we had a deficit of $233 million. We do not have cash reserves in South Australia at the moment so that can only be funded through debt; putting it on the credit card, to put it in simplistic terms for the Treasurer.

We did have a small surplus in 2009-10 but let me point out that was a budget year. If we look at the deficit that is likely to occur this year, the Treasurer himself has said that it is likely to be a $427 million deficit. Already the Treasurer is predicting that next year we are going to have a $263 million deficit, so it is completely inaccurate to tell the people of South Australia that we will not be putting our operating expenses onto the credit card. That is precisely and unequivocally what this Treasurer is doing. Again, he needs to come clean.

Minister O'Brien was correct when he said we were borrowing money to pay our wages. That is precisely what we are doing here in South Australia. I believe the real failure of this budget is the complete neglect of our economy here in South Australia. The Premier proudly announced that he would create 100,000 jobs in this current term of office. That was the centrepiece of his otherwise lacklustre 2010 election campaign. In reality we have gone backwards.

There is no policy supporting his outlandish claim of creating 100,000 jobs. Of course, like so many other times, he misses the fundamentals: governments do not create jobs, it is the private sector which creates jobs. It is the private sector, the small business sector and the family business sector in South Australia which creates the vast amount of employment here in South Australia.

What has this government done to try to help with this great goal of theirs to create 100,000 jobs? I will tell you some of the policies of this Rann government: firstly, they closed the business centre; secondly, they closed the centre for manufacturing. They got rid of the Small Business Advocate and now we are the highest business tax state in Australia. None of those policies, none of those programs of the government and none of those cuts are going to do anything to create one single, additional job.

In this current budget the withdrawal of funding for the BECs cuts in; the withdrawal of funding for CITCSA; the withdrawal of funding for Playford Capital; the closure of Small Business Week; and getting rid of the Family Business Sector Manager within DTED. In fact, if we look at DTED itself, what a complete shell of a ministry that is! Of the nearly 89,000 public sector employees in South Australia, we are now down to 122 in our peak agency dealing with economic development—122. The Premier has more in his spin department.

What are the consequences of this? Unemployment in South Australia is unacceptably high. It is well above the national average. If we look at our exports in South Australia, only 4 per cent of our firms now are exporting. The national average is 14: we are down to 4 per cent. The second lowest is actually Tasmania, at 7 per cent. This government has completely failed our exporters and completely failed our business sector and in so doing has completely failed our employees.

We have the largest interstate migration. In fact, as our leader pointed out the other day, 23 per cent of firms moving interstate are coming from South Australia, leaving here. What we need in South Australia is a government with a plan and a vision. What we need is one that recognises the importance of job creation through supporting business and our economy. Unfortunately, what we have is one racked with division and consumed with ambition at the moment.

I came to this parliament to contribute. The first year we sat only 31 days. This year we are going to sit for only 52 days. The problem with this government is that it does not have a legislative agenda. It does not have policies to support these outlandish goals that it is creating. It needs to do some work, come in here more often, put some policies in place, support our family business sector and ultimately support every employee who wants a job here. This government has sent this state backwards.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (16:26): The grievance debate on the budget bill is when I like to talk about things that are happening in my local electorate. One issue I would like to quickly raise is the disappointment of the residents of my electorate of Unley, which takes in probably two-thirds of the City of Unley and a chunk of the City of Burnside. In the City of Burnside, we are losing a big chunk of open space with the Glenside Hospital, and it was interesting that, in reading the budget papers, I came across two contrary views put to those reading the budget papers in the very same budget papers. In the Budget Overview, Budget Paper 1, when they are talking about mining—PIRSA, obviously—it states:

The Glenside Core Library is recognised by the resources and petroleum industries as one of the best purpose-built drill core reference libraries in the world and is fundamental to identifying the state's mineral and petroleum resources inventory.

A fantastic resource for South Australia, and it is a boast by PIRSA in those budget papers. If we go to Budget Paper 6, the Budget Measures Statement, we see that in the core library facility business case half a million dollars has been allocated to look for alternative sites for that building. So, we are boasting about how wonderful it is, but at the same time the government is looking at spending half a million dollars, which is an extraordinary amount of money to develop a business case, to move it. Obviously, it is looking at selling off more land in Glenside.

If we understand the geography of the seat of Unley, it is geographically the smallest of all the seats in the South Australian parliamentary districts, with 12.2 kilometres. On a busy day, it can take me probably five or six minutes to drive from one end of the electorate to the other—a bit longer in peak hour, particularly if I am running north to south. If I am running north to south, it will take me a lot longer when I am travelling at 2.7 kilometres down Unley Road.

That is another problem we have in Unley, because let's not forget that in 2001 an extensive study was done for dealing with traffic flow and traffic congestion on Unley Road as part of the previous government's plan to deal with the growing suburbs directly south of Unley; it was to deliver a plan to enable peak hour traffic to travel more freely. What is extraordinary about this plan is that it was agreed upon by all stakeholders. Even 68 per cent of bike riders thought it was the best plan for the City of Unley. It would have moved the bike lanes into Porter and Rugby streets.

The council's role was to remove the Stobie poles and replace them with light poles. The department of transport's role was to allow for two lanes in in the morning—dedicated right turning lanes in the centre of the road and a single lane out—and then reversing that situation in the afternoon. It mainly dealt with clearways. It was quite a cost-effective program. It was a cost-effective way of dealing with the peak hour traffic issues on Unley Road.

That got all the way through to the process of being approved. Even the department recommended the budget, that it should go to cabinet. Then there was a change of government. The new transport minister, the Hon. Trish White, was advised by her department head to take that project to cabinet for funding, and she refused to do so. Here we are with the latest RAA traffic report telling us that in that same 10-year period it now takes an extra six minutes to travel down Unley Road in peak hour. On top of that, we are seeing more housing development being allocated south of the city, an enormous expansion of Mount Barker, and more people using Unley Road to get into town, and yet there is no provision to deal with the density of traffic in order to move that traffic.

There is Glen Osmond Road, Fullarton Road, Unley Road and Goodwood Road. All of those roads are fed from the southern and south-eastern suburbs, and that is where we are seeing enormous growth. It is no good saying that we will get on a bus, because the bus gets stuck in traffic as well. I am sure that members understand that a bus actually uses the road and is affected by the slow traffic in those areas. It makes the buses less attractive to travel in because not only are they held up in the traffic but they also have to pull over more often to pick up people.

It is a real battle for the Unley council because it has to deal with the traffic dodgers, those people who try to shoot through the side streets to avoid the main roads, whether that be Goodwood Road, Unley Road or Fullarton Road, to try to save a few minutes getting into town. Of course, there is a uniform 40 km/h speed limit through the side streets of Unley. The only people who complain about that speed limit are those people who do not live in Unley.

Those of us who do live in Unley understand how important it is to have safe streets, and slowing down that traffic does make it safe. Unfortunately, a lot of these people, these road runners, as we like to describe them, think they are still on the main road. They see a clearway through Weller Street at Goodwood, they see someone at the other end, but there is a car parked on either side of the road, and there is a race to see who can get to that gap first; so we see traffic travelling even faster in those areas.

It is very disappointing that we did not see that traffic plan continue because it would have taken a lot of pressure off the small feeder roads, feeder streets, in Unley. It would have helped those people who live in my colleagues' electorates, in the seats of Waite and Davenport, travelling to the city as well. That is a very disappointing part of Unley.

We have recently had a fire on Unley Road. The thing that we learn from this is that SAPOL looks for any excuse to temporarily close the Malvern Police Station. It is always understaffed. Often police are not staffed to cover people who are ill, on leave or training, so that police station has to close earlier than the advertised time on the door. However, this time, it is closed because there was a fire a couple of shops down in the 7 Day Centre on Unley Road.

The last time there was a fire at a police station was not long after I was elected. It was close to 12 months before the police station reopened, so it will be interesting to see how long it will be before the police station reopens in the 7 Day Centre. They are a couple of the issues that I wanted to take this opportunity to raise in the house this afternoon.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (16:35): I would like to talk about a few areas in my electorate that are struggling and continually needing funding via state, federal and local government. The first area I would raise is the township of Sellicks Beach. It has been an interesting transition for me taking on Sellicks Beach, and, indeed, taking Mount Compass back into my electorate.

Sellicks Beach, being the absolute outer southern metropolitan suburb before you go over the hill to Myponga, has been something of an education for myself, and I suspect it has probably been something of an education for them having me because they tell me that they have not seen their local member down there very much in the past, so I have been pleased to have that effect.

It is an area that is largely forgotten. It does, indeed, have some public transport, which is the only part of my electorate that does have regular public transport, but it faces significant environmental issues. Fortunately, the Onkaparinga council recognises its difficulties. It is most concerning that the effluent drainage there runs down footpaths, down gutters and across lawns. The kids play in it in the summer, and it concerns many residents, particularly families with young children. Of course, some people have their own BioCycles and do not want effluent, but by and large most people would welcome it with open arms.

The issue there is that the state government does not seem to want to come to grips with the financial requirements of putting this in. The Onkaparinga council, as the largest council in the state, is stretched to the limit. I have had several discussions with the mayor, Lorraine Rosenberg, CEO Jeff Tate, council staff and others. It is something that needs progressing and something that needs a good outcome sooner rather than later. They feel as though they are forgotten people down there on the extremities of the metropolitan area.

In addition, the farming community across my electorate is running out of patience with the amount of bureaucracy that is being thrust upon it. At the moment, on the Fleurieu we have the western Mount Lofty water allocation plan going through and we now have the eastern Mount Lofty water allocation plan going through.

The farmers on the Fleurieu, like farmers right across the state, across Australia and probably across the world, actually know their own country best of all. They know what needs doing on their own country, they know how to manage their own country, they know how to look after their own country. They understand the environment, and they do not like, nor do they appreciate, bureaucrats coming down and telling them what they should and should not do.

I have not seen the bureaucracy fronting up with tens of thousands of dollars a year in interest payments to help them with their farms, all it seems to do is put more pressure on families in rural areas. I know that school bus runs are being altered on both the Fleurieu and Kangaroo Island. That is upsetting my constituents. It puts additional pressure on farming families, particularly when they find they have to drive many kilometres to take their children to catch the school bus, where the school buses once served.

The vanishing numbers of families with young children obviously mean that school bus routes need addressing from time to time. My view is that the coordinators of the school bus routes within DECS and the central bureaucracy need a good dose of Epsom Salts, or something similar, to wake them up to what is going on.

There are a number of buses in my electorate that are very ancient, well over 20 years old, with no seatbelts, limited comfort inside and no air conditioning. Whilst we accommodate people here catching public transport, having heating and cooling in trams and buses, on Kangaroo Island there are children from as young as four or five catching buses without any sort of creature comforts and, in many cases, no creature comforts at all. I say to the house that this is not good enough. The current Minister for Education—soon to be something else, but I am not quite sure what yet—has been active in discussions on a lot of these issues, but he is not going to change the world overnight.

I think the Minister for Education understands that people in the South Australian community are absolutely, totally and completely fed up with the nonsense that comes out of government and out of politicians' mouths and they want to see some real action. That is the feeling that I get loud and clear across my electorate and in the wider community—that they are sick of nonsense.

They are sick of the nonsense coming from this government, they are sick of nine years of hollow promises, and they are sick of not seeing things that should be done that have not been done. They have just seen a budget handed down by a Treasurer green around the gills who has no idea, and we are rapidly going down this enormous debt spiral in South Australia which is going to be extremely difficult for our children, grandchildren and their children to try to sort out in the long term.

I say to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the only government that can fix up the debt mess in South Australia is a Liberal government. We have the same thing happening now as happened when the Bannon government was in place: they are just leaving an almighty mess and hoping we will pick it up and sort it out. They could not care less.

The absolute arrogance and bullying attitude that we saw in this place this afternoon from the police minister and the Minister for Transport, in respect of the way they treated the member for Bragg, was a disgrace. It was an absolute disgrace. They talked over the top of the member for Bragg, they abused her, they stuck it up her. She is more than capable of handling herself, I might add, but even the Speaker must have been appalled at their behaviour. When is the Labor Party going to sort this mess out? I think South Australians are way over this business of bullying and thuggery that comes from the front bench over there, and it is time that it was sorted out.

The farming community is under immense pressure. We have what has occurred in the northern part of Australia with export cattle being stopped—hopefully temporarily—and already this week we have a 10¢ per kilo reduction in the price of cattle going through the markets here just from the enormous influx that has already come in. It is inherently dangerous.

It is interesting that out of the announcements last week—just returning to road funding and the bit for Kangaroo Island that is coming forward—I had a couple of phone calls from Mr John Melbourne who runs the Andermel Marron Farm, to which I have taken minister Caica and minister Weatherill at different times to meet local members of the community, and we have been around the traps and had a good look. Mr Melbourne has spent in the vicinity of millions of dollars, I would suggest, developing a fantastic business there, but the problem is that for three or four months of the year you cannot get down the road to it.

The road is absolutely appalling. We have the surfing competition coming fairly shortly to Vivonne Bay, and Mr Melbourne's property is just up the road and the road condition is appalling. It is a district road, but I think the road funding needs to go a lot further. Mr Melbourne has a justifiable complaint about the condition of his road, and I would hope that, when the Labor Party visits the island in July, a few of them might go out to Andermel Marron Farm and enjoy what they have to offer out there and take a good look at the road.

This budget has not done a lot for rural South Australia, and it has not done a lot for my electorate. I noted what the member for Davenport said earlier about what he does not get. It is a travesty of justice that this single-minded government, intent on doing everything they can to help themselves and employ each other's family members by the look of the staff notices in the varying staff outlines that come through on the computer. They are a self-serving pack of rats as far as I am concerned and, with what we saw today with the election of Hon Russell Wortley as a minister in the upper house, they are really struggling.

Time expired.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite) (16:45): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As this budget progresses to the final stage of grieves, one reflects back over the last few weeks and looks for some sign of life from the government, in fact, some sign of life from the parliament, that there is a vision for the future.

Sadly, I think, our constituents, the taxpayers of South Australia, must be looking at this debate and languishing in concern, not only for their own future but also for that of their children and grandchildren, for it has been a very lacklustre debate, as indeed it has been a very lack lustre budget, missing completely is any grand vision for the future, missing completely is any long-term purview. Instead, what we have been dealt in the parliament are short-term plans, short-term initiatives and short-term budget figures that deal with the year ahead and not much further in any meaningful way.

The key to all this is getting the state economy in order. As has been said by others, 'It's about the economy, stupid,' and, without that, nothing else works, and there is little in this budget to stimulate the sort of transformational change to this state's economy which is needed.

The state budget is approaching a difficult place. We had the disaster of the State Bank in the 1990s. The legacy of the Olsen and Brown governments was that they paid off the debt and put the state back on its feet. This government walked in in 2002 to an outstanding set of books, with debt virtually vanquished and at the cusp of one of the greatest booms this country has ever seen. Sadly, the great opportunity of the six years from 2002-08, one of greatest boom periods in this state's history, was wasted by the Rann Labor government.

Nothing was built. No vision was created. Nothing tangible was achieved. Now there is a splatter of activity at the end of its life—in its ninth or 10th year—to start building things, to start doing things, but it is too late. I welcome some of the initiatives, and I give the government some credit for at least pressing ahead with things like the Northern Expressway, though the figures were bungled; the underpass along South Road under Anzac Highway, though, again, the figures were bungled. I give it some credit for at least the Superway, as it is being called, that is to be built on the northern extremities of South Road. I will be pleased to see that happen.

Under pressure and as the consequence of initiatives from the Liberal government, we have the desalination plant. It should have been a 50 gigalitre plant. The government went a 50 gigalitre step too far and it has resulted in almost $1 billion worth of waste, but at least we have some resilience now in our water supply.

I welcome the fact that we are getting a new hospital. It is being built in the wrong place. It is not a regeneration and reinvention of the hospital that we have: it is going to be the 'rail yards hospital', but at least we are going to get a new hospital; but, sadly, of all the initiatives in the budget this is the one that financially worries me the most, because it is a rotten deal in terms of cash outlays and it is a blatant unabridged callous privatisation. The government that promised 'no more privatisation'—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: Oh, here we have the galah from Cheltenham, in here with his dictionary, ready to nitpick. If only the former attorney-general could—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Point of order. Excuse me, member—

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: —elevate his brain beyond—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, member for Waite! Member for Waite, order! There is a point of order. Could you please take your seat. As a military person I thought that you would understand the concept of the order. Minister, you had a point of order?

The Hon. T.R. KENYON: Ma'am, the member for Waite referred to the member for Croydon as an animal. I believe that's unparliamentary.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Actually, as a bird.

The Hon. T.R. KENYON: They are all animals—a species.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, I do accept the minister's point of order, but I should note that, earlier on in question time, a person from my right referred to the person on my left as a parrot. So, you know, galah, parrot, birds—I think we'll let this one go. Member for Waite.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH: Thank you very much. Sadly, the hospital will cost this state, as we have heard, billions over its lifetime, and a first-class hospital could have been delivered to the people of South Australia far more inexpensively if we had done it the way the opposition envisaged—but at least we are going to get a new hospital.

Again, we are going to get an extension to the Convention Centre—again, a Liberal initiative, copied from us. We are going to get a new oval in the city—a renewed oval and football into the city—and I think that is good as well. We are going to get an electrified rail system; I welcome that. We are getting these initiatives at the back end of the government's term, initiatives that should have been built and commenced in their first term, not now.

So, the fact that those infrastructure initiatives are going to be made I think is something to be welcomed. Sadly though, because the government has so bungled the books of state we are going to find our children and our grandchildren paying for them. The problem we have is that there is only one way to sort the books out: we either have to get our income up or our expenses down.

Sadly, this government has already ratcheted the income up to its optimum point. We are the highest taxed state in the country. There is no more blood to be squeezed. There is no more juice to be squashed out of the lemon. We have milked the people of South Australia dry, through a government that looks to increase its revenues before it first looks to keep its expenses under control.

Sadly, as we found in 1993-94, when the Liberals last came into office, we will have to sort out Labor's mess, and that is going to require getting the expenses under control—doing something about the 18,000 public servants that this government has hired beyond those that were on the books when they first came to government, many of whom cannot be explained in terms of doctors, nurses or teachers.

I note that a state Labor government has now, in the history of this state, taken the step of removing tenure for the Public Service. It is official: from 2014, there will be no more tenure for the Public Service. Public servants can effectively be sacked at will, and a state Labor government—the Rann Labor government—has delivered that, and the opposition has announced today that it will not get in the way.

So, you have delivered it. Labor has delivered that change, and we will be reminding the Public Service Association and every government worker for years, possibly decades to come, that a Labor government made the monumental step of abolishing tenure for public employees. It is your legacy to carry, and it will be your cross to bear. You have done it. You have delivered it in this budget, and we will not get in the way.

Perhaps they realise, themselves, that they are going to have to make some dramatic changes after 2014, and they are foreshadowing those changes. But, you will need to get the expenses down; you already have the incomes up. We need to get WorkCover organised. It is the most inefficient and incompetently run scheme in the country. And we need to do something about tax reform.

I would urge members to re-read the Tax Summit report from a tax summit that I organised in June 2007. I have it here, and it is available on my website. Have a look at the many recommendations that flowed from industry as a result of that tax summit that dealt with: stamp duty on residential and commercial conveyances; residential land tax; commercial land tax; payroll tax and mining royalties; taxes on motorists; gambling; insurance taxes; environmental taxes; and fees. levies and charges. The work was all done in 2007 and 2008 by the opposition. You need to get the tax regime down.

We also need to maintain the momentum on industrial relations reform, and we need to reinvent industry in this state if we are to generate the sort of export revenues that we need in order to grow the economy. To do that, you are going to need to find a new formula to reinvigorate manufacturing, which has fallen off a cliff and is crashing to the rocks below. That reinvention of manufacturing is going to need to be based around science and innovation.

We need to get action happening on mining, not just exploration. We have had the talk, but we have not had the delivery. Even if we do get the delivery on Roxby Downs, in the overall scheme of the number of projects underway in Australia at the moment it is significant, but it is not monumental. On a national scale, it is just another project compared with multiples more of billions that are being cab-ranked in WA and Queensland, offshore and onshore, in terms of projects underway.

Welcome though it will be, fantastic though it will be, we need to get out and find more mining opportunities, and we have to make sure that we get the added value in terms of employment and other benefits from it. Most important of all, though, we need plans over 20 to 30 years, and we need budgets that deliver results over 20 to 30 years, otherwise we are wasting our time.


[Sitting extended beyond 17:00 on motion of Hon. P. Caica]


Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (16:56): I take the opportunity today in this grievance debate to raise a number of issues that are pertinent to my electorate in the South-East. My electorate has never fared well in a Labor budget not just from this Labor government but also from previous Labor governments, but I feel that my electorate is particularly being picked on in this particular budget, and I will raise just a couple of the issues.

Obviously, there has been a lot said about the proposal to forward sell up to three rotations of the ForestrySA forests. I remind the house that I asked a question of the Minister for Forests this week, pointing out that it was revealed in Victoria at the beginning of this week that a company that was contracted to mill logs, to process logs out of Victorian state forests, was actually putting those whole logs into shipping containers and then exporting them—over the Melbourne wharves and exporting them off into Asia to be processed.

ACIL Tasman did a study into the regional impact of the forward sale. The government accepted the conclusions of ACIL Tasman that there would be no export or no substantial export of logs out of the South-East. I do not know how they drew that conclusion. I think that the study was flawed, but I do not know how they drew that conclusion. I asked the minister, in light of the revelation of what is happening across the border in Victoria, whether he now accepted that the report that he has been working on, and that the government is taking its action based upon, might have got it wrong.

To my surprise, the minister said, 'Oh, well, we have the ups and downs, the swings in the housing industry, which impact greatly upon the profitability of the sawmills that are processing the logs, and of course sometimes we will have log exported.' He was making the argument that, when there was a downturn in the local or the domestic timber industry, it might be a good thing if we exported log to keep the harvesting side of the industry going.

That is exactly what the people in the South-East do not want to happen. They want that resource protected from export such that it will underpin a viable processing industry in the South-East. That is what underpins most of the jobs, that is what underpins most of the economy of the region around Mount Gambier and across the South-East. It is not about just growing the forests and producing the log; it is about all the value-adding that we can do to that. That is what it is about, and the minister, in answer to my question on Tuesday this week, suggested that he fully expected, from time to time, log to be exported. That sent a shiver down my spine, and I am sure those very people he has sitting on a round table to give him advice will be equally horrified at the minister's answer. I will be making sure that those people are well aware of his answer and have a copy of it.

On that point, how disappointing it was for the people of the South-East when they learned that the leaders in the community, and the leaders in the fight to have the government change its position with regard to the forward sale, were corralled by the government into a round table to advise the minister and to empower those people and at the first meeting it was demanded that they sign a confidentiality agreement so that they could not go back and talk to their community about what they were doing on their behalf. It is absolutely outrageous that the government would treat the people of the South-East with such contempt, because I believe that is what it is doing.

I also touch on the Keith hospital. I had a meeting with my colleague the member for Morphett a few weeks ago. He was in the South-East looking at the whole gamut of health issues across the South-East and we called in and spent some time at the Keith hospital and we met with the chairman of the board, some of the board members and some of the senior staff of the hospital. It was a good meeting. I was delighted that the people of Keith, who are working incredibly hard to save their hospital, were able to give us some of their time and walk us through the current issues with regard to that hospital.

Notwithstanding what the minister keeps saying, I report to the house that the Keith hospital is under very serious threat. The doors are only still open because the community is raising and putting its own money on the table to keep those doors open. The reality is that they believe there are some opportunities to get additional funding, particularly from the commonwealth government and particularly with regard to the aged-care services they provide, but they have to make the case and then they will have to wait until that is assessed and then the funds may start to flow. All of that may well take six to 12 months, and in the meantime they are struggling.

We saw a horrific motor accident on the Riddoch Highway only a week ago, one of the worst motor accidents for the year in this state. Some of the traumatised victims of that accident ended up in the Keith hospital. They are incredibly grateful that that hospital is there, and, again, the point is made that you can airlift people who need additional care at a more major hospital directly from the Keith hospital to the likes of the Royal Adelaide Hospital without having to stop the helicopter to refuel. It is a very important and strategic hospital and it needs to stay there.

It is an absolute disgrace that this government has let matters get to where they are. This government is quite happy, it seems, to sit back and allow that hospital to slide into oblivion. The minister should have come out on day one and said, 'We are not going to let this hospital go. We are going to continue the funding to ensure that it stays operational and viable. In the meantime we are going to work with the board because we think they can do things better and get some extra funding out of Canberra.' That is what should have happened, but unfortunately this minister, who has no regard for country people, said, 'You go off and fund yourselves in the meantime.'

Mrs Geraghty: That is not true.

Mr WILLIAMS: It is true. If it was not true the minister would have done the right thing by those people.

In the last couple of minutes that are available to me I want to talk about the other hit that is aimed firmly at my electorate by this budget, and that is the proposal to now charge the landholders in the South-East a drainage levy for the drains that crisscross the South-East and take away the floodwaters because that part of the state is subject to inundation. In fact, it is subject to great inundation, and we have a fantastic drainage system there which has been developed for a period of about 150 years.

I could speak on this matter for hours but I do not have that time. What I can say is I think the government has not done its homework on this issue. This was put forward as a proposal either in the late 1960s or the early 1970s, and after years of work, the proposal was canned because to operate a system of levying on those drains was going to cost more than it was going to raise in the levy. I want to point out to the house that the drains are not just there for the benefit of agriculture. In fact, my constituents in the Upper South-East, where the most recent drainage system has been constructed over the last 10 or a little bit more years, would argue that that scheme is more involved with environmental outcomes than it is with agricultural outcomes.

The Hon. P. Caica interjecting:

Mr WILLIAMS: The minister does not agree but there are many, many farmers there who lament—they agree that the drains are helping them, but they lament that the drains were put there specifically to get environmental outcomes and it has compromised the value of the drains as an agricultural system. The reality is that the drains were originally constructed to aid transport, because the good people of Mount Gambier were petitioning the British government, to secede from South Australia and to form a new colony.

Mrs Geraghty interjecting:

Mr WILLIAMS: This was back in the mid-1800s. This is why you people need to know a little about history. You want to understand what has been going on in this state. It is very disappointing that my time is up, but I will have more to say on this matter.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for MacKillop. Even I should probably state that I do not think the member for Torrens was alive in the mid-1800s. I think that is drawing a long, long bow. Member for Morphett.

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (17:06): Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The big problem with health in this state, besides the minister, is the fact that I have had such a short time in this place to actually talk about the $4.6 billion budget that we have. I have 4½ hours in estimates, a billion dollars an hour, we are 20 minutes in the budget speech and I have 10 minutes now, and every day there is another issue in health. Today we saw the issue of patients being crammed into treatment rooms which really are storage rooms at Flinders Medical Centre, and I understand that this is happening all over South Australia in our major public hospitals because they are full to bursting—full to bursting!

The minister also had a go at me about exaggerating the time that people are in the emergency departments. We know that the four-hour target that they have is failing. It is failing in Western Australia; even my Liberal colleagues there, who manage the health system much better than this lot here do, are unable to implement the four-hour system. Read TheWest Australian, read what the unions are saying over there; the four-hour system is not achievable. You are going to kill people the same way as they did in the Mid Stafford area in England if you insist on doing that.

People are waiting a long time to get into hospital in the EDs, and they are waiting even longer once they are in the emergency departments. If the minister does not believe me—and he said today it was not true—well, minister, go and read your own CAP plans, your capacity planning documents. Go and read those, because the one I was using for the hours that the minister said were wrong was Monday 20 June at 2.21pm from the Royal Adelaide Hospital: the emergency department, ED occupancy, 61; ED patients waiting greater than four hours, 17; ED patients waiting longer than eight hours, 8; ED patients waiting longer than 12 hours, 7; EDALOS (average length of stay), so the average length of stay in the ED, in hours per patient was 35.9 hours—35.9 hours!

I got one of these today for the Flinders Medical Centre, because we know there is a crisis down there, but I think there is a mistake in this one. I do give the minister the benefit of the doubt with this one. I think there is a typo here. Today at 11:05 in the Flinders Medical Centre, in the ED inpatient area the occupancy was 19; there are 18 admissions today; there was a discharge today of 2; but it said the ALOS there, their average length of stay in hours per patient in the ED, was 534.3 hours. That is like 22 days!

Even I do not believe that the mismanagement is that bad, so I will give the minister a bit of leeway there. I know he will be listening, and his overworked minions will be listening. Let's get what the real figure is there, but I bet it is not a lot better than the 35.9 hours that the patients were waiting at the Royal Adelaide on Monday afternoon. They were waiting there and let's hope they are not still waiting now, because when you look at the capacity management plans for our hospitals, when you look at them right through till Saturday, Saturday at 4 o'clock in the morning, you can see in black and white and red lines on there that the hospital is up over capacity. Even their predicted capacity, the actual capacity, is greater than that. They are bursting at the seams, and what do we see from this minister? Rack 'em, pack 'em and stack 'em in storerooms.

This has been going on a while. I say that because a very, very dear man, a lovely man and a client of mine in my veterinary practice for many years who used to bring his dogs to me—I will not mention his name—had terminal cancer, and he was in the last stages of his life at Flinders Medical Centre. He could not go into the palliative care area and he was put into a storeroom. His family were absolutely distraught that this lovely man ended his life in a storeroom at Flinders Medical Centre.

This minister knew about it because it was covered on the TV. He has done nothing about it, and he is doing nothing to improve hospital conditions in South Australia, other than saying, 'It's all happening, 2014, 2016.' Minister, you have been there with minister Stevens for nearly 10 years now. You had rivers of gold pouring into this state and you have stuffed it up. You have nothing more to offer than denial and delay and deflect. It is just not good enough.

In the few minutes left to me I would like to talk about what this budget is not doing in the electorate of Morphett. Unfortunately, Morphett has been a safe Liberal seat. I say 'unfortunately' in as much as we are happy to have it because I love the people down there. I feel privileged to be representing them, but this government knows that they are not going to win it, so they put what in there? Peanuts, unless it is going to affect possible areas that might affect them.

What we are looking at here is the flood mitigation schemes, the Barcoo Outlet and, in this case, we have a few million dollars in there to fix up the lock gates down at the Pat. There is nothing much this year; $320,000 this year and the total budget for that is $3.6 million—not a lot when you have a premier tourism area, the only declared tourism area in South Australia.

Millions of people come there every year. We get 25,000 for the New Year's Eve party, when 70,000 plus people arrive; not all of them are my constituents. I love to have them, but they are not all constituents. It is just not good enough, particularly when you consider that the value of properties in the electorate of Morphett is sky-high—land tax and stamp duty alone. I could tell you how many hundreds of thousands of dollars in stamp duty that my wife and I have paid to the state coffers in the last 10 years. It is hundreds of thousands of dollars. We are happy to invest and progress and work our backsides off. We do not mind paying some tax, but the tax that is being levied on the people of Morphett through stamp duty and land tax is just so discouraging.

One constituent I spoke to the other day, who lives a couple of houses down, is selling 10 or 12 apartments in Alice Springs. He said, 'Duncan there is no way I will reinvest that money in South Australia. We are going to Victoria.' I said, 'Why?' He said, 'Stamp duty and land tax. Why the hell would I invest here?' That is a disincentive. The government is missing out; 1 per cent of something is better than 100 per cent of nothing, minister.

You have got to balance your budgets, whether it is a home budget, a business budget or the state budget. You can not live beyond your means. Let's not kill the golden goose. People who are working hard in South Australia, developing this state, do not mind putting in. They will put in to develop themselves, they will put in to develop the state, and they deserve a lot more than they are getting here.

We saw last year's budget and it is carrying on, even with Glenelg Community Hospital. My son was born at the Glenelg Community Hospital, and my wife has been there as a patient. It is a fantastic community hospital. I understand that members opposite have family members who have been in the Glenelg Community Hospital. I congratulate them on that because it is a fabulous hospital. I understand that the South Australian Dental Service uses it for general anaesthetics for kids for dental work because it is a fantastic hospital.

But what did we see last year? We saw a miserable cut to the Recovery at the Bay program. These were long-stay patients coming out of the Repat and out of Flinders who were recovering from hospital treatments, who did not need an acute bed at $1,200 a day. Glenelg was offering them at $120 a day, 10 per cent of what they were being charged for an acute bed. Massive savings, but, no, the government cuts that.

Those patients, as I understand it, are going into some of the intermediate care beds in Flinders, the Repat and other places, and some of them are going down to McLaren Vale & Districts War Memorial Hospital. It is a great hospital, but even people down at McLaren Vale said to me, 'How are they going to get here, Duncan? We're happy to have them, but how are they going to get here? There is no tram down to McLaren Vale.' What is happening there is just not good enough.

Let us talk about some of the non-spend in the electorate of Morphett. If you want a terrific example, the electorate of Morphett used to share a boundary with the electorate of Bright. That boundary was at Hove, by the Foodland and Holder Road. They still share a boundary but it has moved north now up to Whyte Street. I lost one of my best booths to Bright. I love all of my constituents though.

If you want to see what happens go there, in fact you do not even need to go there, look on my website and you will see footage of me standing on Brighton Road, with one foot in Bright and one foot in Morphett. What is in Bright? New bitumen on Brighton Road and old bitumen in Morphett.

Go down to Anzac Highway and Morphett Road today, which is the boundary of Morphett and West Torrens—and it goes across into Elder once you get past the racetrack—you will see old bitumen in Morphett and new bitumen on Anzac Highway in West Torrens, going on into Ashford and Elder. Morphett misses out again and again.

One thing that really puzzles me about the Minister for Transport is that we seem to be the only place in the world where you cannot run heritage trams. We built the old H class trams at Edwardstown, yet we cannot run them here as a heritage tram. This is the only place in the world where you cannot do that.

This government cannot see the wood for the trees. It is selling the woods off, we know that; it is selling the forests off, so there will be no trees left anyway. Let us have a look at where we are going. Let us look to the future. Let us look to building more than just shiny monuments to Mike Rann. Let us look to building a state for all South Australians. Let us not penalise progress. Let us not penalise success. Let us make sure that South Australians get what they deserve, and that is not what this government is giving.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (17:16): I rise today to make a contribution to the Appropriation Bill 2011. I want to talk about some of the things that have been inflicted on us in this budget. At the Mid-Year Budget Review there was an $81 million surplus. That has now turned into a budget deficit of $263 million in 2011-12, and as the budget deficits roll out they go to $114 million, $80 million and $655 million surpluses in the forward estimates.

Debt is rising to $8.2 billion over the forward estimates, which is a $900 million difference to the 9.1 infrastructure program that Labor has in place. I note that financial liabilities are up to $20 billion by 2014, and the cost of living increases for families are up $750 per year. I notice the liquor licensing fee increases which will impact on our pubs and clubs, which is basically the open door tax, a price rise of $4 million per year.

The Office of Public Integrity, the Clayton's ICAC, will only be funded at $3 million per year, commencing in the year 2012-13. When we look at further public sector job cuts, we see more job cuts of 400, on top of the 3,750 job cuts in the public sector last year. There is $396 million in deferred capital works, and this involves projects in my community which I spoke about last night, the Murray Bridge police station which has been deferred by 18 months.

The Riverside precinct has been delayed by two years, so that will begin in 2015. The government has made a pre-budget release of a $600 million drop in GST, and this is what the government has announced. It is actually $650 million less in GST and royalties compared to the 2008-09 years. People need to understand what the government is referring to here. The government is really $52 million better off on GST since the 2010-11 Mid-Year Budget Review over three years.

There is no funding for any upgrade to the current Royal Adelaide Hospital which is going to have to survive quite a long time before we get the monument to Mike Rann finished on the rail yards. We see the state's first home owner payment abolished and we see $1.1 billion in extra taxes over the forward estimates imposed on the people of this state. We see driver's licence renewals are up by 32 per cent and speeding fines up by 29 per cent, and this is for speeding less than 15 km/h over the limit.

We see water rates, for everyone across this state, up to 50 to 60 per cent increase and more increases coming. Those increased fees make me fearful for what's going to happen to agriculture in this state. I have had many constituents come to me, especially constituents who have had to access water—like where I live off the Keith pipeline because water is too saline. We have had the Keith pipeline in place with River Murray water coming through it since the 1960s and that has been a boon for our area. But the problem is, it is becoming uneconomic for people connected to reticulated water in agriculture. We see the cost to piggeries, to feed lots and to people running mobs of cattle on dryland farms because the simple fact is they are not going to drink any less water. You need to clean their water troughs out to make sure they have good clean water.

People are saying it is just going to become unviable, and there is a real risk that we will see people abandon these areas. I know that there were emergency procedures put in to put pipes in around to Meningie and Narrung. Once we got through the bureaucracy it was great to see that the one thing that did work was the contractors, who really got going, and they had several crews going, and I must commend them. They had rock saws and several crews operating in a hurry to make sure that water got delivered—if only the bureaucracy previously could have operated just as quickly.

The sad thing is people are still heavily reliant on this pipe water because some of these people live around Lake Albert, and previous to the drought they were drawing fresh water from Lake Albert for their farming operations. But, no, we still have the effects of the Narrung bund, about which the government has not just hesitated, it has basically stalled in removing it. We see the problem with the bund at Clayton and Currency Creek. We have had the minister tell us that they are not sure how to get it out. I do not think it is that difficult. Just hire the contractors, get the money on the ground, and get it done.

When these things went in under emergency procedures, they went in relatively quickly but the bureaucracy and the bungling around applying for finance to get rid of these structures so that the people of communities around the Lower Lakes and the lower Murray can get the benefit of the fresh water that has been thundering down this river since the rains during last year is dissipating, because these people should be able to access this water that is coming down.

We have had thousands of gigalitres come back down through the river system, and it is a great boon, but I feel for those hundreds of producers, cattle producers, sheep producers and also people involved in our viticulture industries and other irrigation. The orchards and other associated horticulture, especially the ones that are on piped reticulated water, are paying through the nose.

I have had one grower in Murray Bridge—a herb operation—who basically said to me, 'Well, we've got to go. It's got too dear. We've got to get back next to the river and purchase an allocation because it's just uneconomic to put this water through the pipe.' I am very fearful that we will see a lot of this landscape turn into houses that will just be abandoned. It will be like the people who tried to grow wheat north of the Goyder line many years ago around Hawker. You just see relics of the farming operations that were there because they tried to crop wheat far too north in this state.

Another thing I want to talk about—and we were talking about it in a bill earlier today—is the introduction of more fixed speed cameras to raise revenue. The government—

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

Mr PEDERICK: Yes, absolutely. Why would you put them in otherwise? The government has targeted speed cameras to raise an extra $24 million in additional expiation fees in 2011-12. We see payroll tax up by $91 million in 2011-12. We see taxes across this state up by more than double the rate of inflation in each year of the forward estimates.

We see other projects that are being deferred. The government is still a long way off balancing a budget, but it is deferring $193 million relating to rail network standardisation. We see regulatory fees up by $75 million in 2011-12 and an increase of $199 million in the forward estimates. We also see (and I mentioned it last night in my speech) that SA Lotteries will be privatised.

As I mentioned last night, here we have a government that is so anti-privatisation, but it is quite happy to sell off the lotteries, which is very much a profit-making venture, similar to its privatisation of the South-East forests, because it has no vision outside of the urban areas. Certainly, I feel in my mind that the forward sale of the forests is just pillaging the South-East for the government's coffers.

Time expired.

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (17:27): Before I start, I just want to inform the house of the passing of the Hon. Ken Vaughan. He was a Queensland Labor MP. He was a man I had a lot of admiration for. I played bowls with him for nearly 20 years. I am very sad, indeed. He will be sorely missed by the fraternity of past parliamentary bowls players right across Australia.

I would also like to note that this week it is 10 years since a good friend of mine, Mrs Margarete Hale, passed away. I did note that at the time in this house on the Hansard. It is 10 years, and she was one of those people you never forget. Another day in the diary. We do, certainly, again, remember Margarete, and also pay our condolences to the Vaughan family in Queensland. We have sent a card on behalf of this parliament.

Mr Pederick interjecting:

Mr VENNING: He was, and a damn good bloke to boot. Rural and regional South Australia has long been forgotten by the Rann Labor government; however, this has become more apparent in the last few months. I note that we have a past minister of agriculture sitting here, and I am pleased he is here. He can comment or interject if he wishes.

Again, agriculture received nothing in the recent budget—agriculture, a sector that has been gutted in previous years by Labor continues to be slashed. I also have the shadow minister right alongside me, which I am pleased about. The agriculture, food and fisheries budget was slashed from $216 million to $181 million in 2011-12. These figures include a $11.3 million reduction in expenditure for the Exceptional Circumstances program, completion of the State Drought Response Program and a drop of $4.3 million in the agriculture, food and wine programs. Cuts were also made to SARDI. The budget paper states:

The $2.7 million decrease in expenses is due to a reduction in research and development activity and service delivery to meet budget savings targets.

It is ludicrous that, at a time when food security is becoming a very real issue and the future of agriculture will be of utmost importance, the government slashes research and development. I cannot understand how the Rann government can expect the agricultural industry to succeed into the future when it continues to gut it.

Farmers today, more than ever before, need professional, unbiased advice not just from private consultants who usually often have a strong commercial bias or link. Many of the fertiliser companies, chemical companies and fuel companies have their own agronomists, so obviously their advice will be product-focused. I am not being critical about that; at least you have some people out there who know the business. When the department of agriculture was there, they always gave you good, unbiased advice. A lot of people within the department (which is shedding its staff) end up working for these larger companies, and we have someone on our farm who is an ex-department trained agronomist.

In a recent submission by the Australian Food and Grocery Council to a national food plan, the claim was made that Australia faces severe food shortages in 10 years if governments do not act immediately. The Rann Labor government has not only failed to act in relation to ensuring our food security into the future but the cuts it has made to agriculture are detrimental, removing all the research and development and removing the voice farmers had via the Advisory Board of Agriculture.

I wonder what a notable previous Labor minister of agriculture, who introduced SARDI, thinks about this—and I will name the Hon. Lynn Arnold, who was later premier. This Labor government's decision to withdraw funding from the board on 30 June is another slap in the face to country people and to one of the state's most important industries. Why is the minister wishing to sever the long-held tie with agriculture for the sake of the cost of one salary? I have raised this matter with the minister several times and voiced my concerns very strongly, but to no avail.

The Advisory Board of Agriculture has served in South Australia for over 123 years, providing the minister with advice and allowing knowledge, information and data about agricultural issues to be exchanged. The ABA is also the managing body of the strong Agricultural Bureau movement of South Australia—the strongest farmer extension body in Australia. I sat on the board myself for eight years, and I firmly believe that governments of both persuasions got very good value, especially if they wanted to work with it, as most did.

It was a pleasure to work with Labor ministers, and I will name them: the Hon. Kym Mayes listened and took advice from the board, and the Hon. Frank Blevins was a good minister for agriculture because he took advice.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: You didn't say that at the time.

Mr VENNING: Yes I did; I always have. He took good advice. The Hon. Lynn Arnold I named and, while I did not serve with the Hon. Paul Caica, I understand the board speaks glowingly of him. They never got political, they never gave the minister a hard time, they always kept the confidence, and that is why I feel so sorry now that the board is unable to come out and defend itself. It has not, and it will not. They sit there and take this in total silence, and I think they ought to be speaking up—maybe that is why I am doing this now.

It seems that the current minister has no real understanding of how important this board is. I am a bit concerned about discussing letters in this place, but in this instance I think I have to, and I apologise for doing so, but I was outraged by the minster's response to a letter I sent him outlining my concerns. The letter, which I received a few weeks ago, stated:

Over time, with the growth of agribusiness, professional bodies and the revolution of information technology, the minister's reliance on the ABA as a source of information has diminished.

All I can say is that it is very sad indeed. I think the budget last year for the whole board was about $160,000, and that is for a board of 10 people, plus a research officer. If you could not get value out of that, I would be absolutely surprised.

I wonder how the current members of the board feel about the minister's comments that the information they provide to the government is no longer sufficient. He has shown a complete disregard for a board that has served South Australian agriculture well for over 123 years, or is it because he has not had the opportunity to build a rapport or relationship with the board and to use it to mutual advantage?

I think it is like everything else and, as the previous minister would know, if you wish to use these boards and have confidence in them, I am sure that a very strong mutual advantage can be struck up. In this instance, I do not believe that has ever happened, because the minister has not been in the job long enough.

The minister also said, 'The cost of running the ABA is significant and competes for highly contested funds.' I am extremely doubtful that forming a new Agribusiness Council will be more cost-effective than continuing with the existing structure of the ABA. The government has decided to replace the ABA, which meets on average 10 days per year, with an Agribusiness Council that will only meet eight hours per year. I would be very interested to see a cost analysis comparing the ABA and the new Agribusiness Council once it has been in operation for a year or so.

As I would know, board members on the ABA are selected from the agricultural bureaus across South Australia, and the minister vets those appointments. Members were paid a very basic mileage and sitting allowance; certainly not enough to meet their personal out-of-pocket expenses. This is another bad decision by the Labor government and I am sorry that it is at the expense of the very historic Advisory Board of Agriculture. 30 June will indeed be a sad day.

The attitude of the Labor government towards rural and regional South Australia is one of utter contempt. Yes, the sky is falling down. I know the member for Mitchell made that profound statement yesterday.

Mr Sibbons: Put your hard hat on.

Mr VENNING: I did listen. I am angry, and South Australians living outside metropolitan Adelaide are angry that we face continual cuts to services and receive next to nothing in new projects, initiatives or programs. When you consider what the budget for agriculture was in 2002 and what it is today, it is an appalling disgrace. If you follow this graph down, it will not exist in a decade. There is no joy in this budget for anyone, but rural and regional South Australia again appears to have borne the brunt of budget cuts and neglect. I am encouraged that, hopefully when the Liberals are elected to government in 2014, the board—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: You have been saying that ever since 2002.

Mr VENNING: —will be immediately reinstated. I don't think there will be any doubt about the decision come 2014, because, really, 51 per cent of the people of South Australia did not want you in 2010, but I think by 2014 it will be more like 65 per cent, unless you can totally rebirth it. Anyway, I am not here to play base politics, I am here to get results and to deliver for the people that put me here. I know I am judged that way. I wish we could turn it all around.

Mr SIBBONS (Mitchell) (17:37): It is increasingly obvious that the members opposite have no answers, no alternatives and no policies to offer in response to the Rann Labor government's latest budget. The government has been investing in infrastructure and jobs for today and the years ahead, paving the way for a brighter, safer and more prosperous tomorrow for our children and grandchildren.

Meanwhile, the opposition has no alternatives, no significant policy announcements and no ideas. While those opposite are a policy-free zone, the government is getting on with the job and laying solid, sensible foundations for the future. Massive investments in public transport and road upgrades, and projects such as the Adelaide Oval redevelopment, the new Royal Adelaide Hospital and the state aquatic centre at Marion are examples of sound policy and real action that will benefit South Australians for generations to come. The 2011-12 budget appropriations legislation before us continues to build on those foundations with well-targeted, responsible measures, delivering to areas of greatest need.

I have already mentioned some of these measures today, and I wish to flesh out the detail in one particular area—that of support for vulnerable South Australian families, particularly those living with disability. The budget has a strong focus on supporting such families and includes new spending of $149 million to help thousands of vulnerable South Australians to remain healthy, to feel secure and to be able to have access to the services or assistance they need. My esteemed colleague Treasurer Snelling said:

For many people with a disability and their families, children in foster care, the elderly and those struggling to find somewhere stable to live, it is often difficult to achieve things other people take for granted.

That is so true, and that is why since the government came to office in 2002 it has worked to lend a hand to these South Australian battlers. The 2011-12 budget continues this tradition. Disability funding has almost doubled since 2002; however, it is a growing sector, and the government recognises that it is an area in need of more assistance in practical and financial terms.

In this coming year, South Australians with a disability, and their families and carers, will benefit from a wide range of budget measures. Generally, disability funding is being bolstered by more than $37 million over the next four years. This support will help disability clients' needs, accommodation support, community access and respite services for carers. This comes on top of the extra $70.9 million committed over four years in the last budget.

There is also a new allocation of more than $10 million being budgeted in recurrent funding over four years to help meet the demand for disability equipment now and into the future. This will help to reduce waiting lists and give people living with disabilities access to the equipment they need sooner. A further $7.7 million is being allocated to help relocate 32 of the current 63 residents of the Strathmont Centre in supported accommodation into the community, while around $400,000 will be spent on the remaining residual villas and site infrastructure at the centre to improve the accommodation for remaining residents.

The sum of $8 million over four years will be invested in works to be identified in the Public Transport Disability Action Plan. This will involve upgrading pathways, platforms, information displays and shelters at rail and bus interchanges to support improved accessibility. Funds will be increased for the South Australian Transport Subsidy Scheme, which delivers subsidised taxi fares for people with mobility impairment. The $63 million being invested over four years from 2011-12 will ensure that the government continues to deliver the same level of service in the coming years, despite an increase in taxi fares. Of course, we are also continuing to revamp our public transport fleets on the way to having all buses, trains and trams accessible for people with disabilities.

We are also continuing to revamp our public transport fleets to ensure that the broader impacts of living with a disability have been met. I have met with a number of constituents for whom everyday tasks, such as getting from A to B, can be a real challenge. Just recently, my officers met with a young woman who has various physical disabilities and mental health issues. She told me of the difficulties involved in getting herself showered and dressed, preparing meals and accessing transport. She has also endured a long wait for an appropriate wheelchair.

Here is one of many similar stories, which is why it is important that the government invests in improving the lives of people with disabilities across the wide variety of areas mentioned. Always more help is needed, but I am proud of the work the government is doing in this area and the planning and provisions being made for the future improvements.

As well as targeted assistance to people with disabilities, other ways in which this budget is helping to support vulnerable South Australian families include: $50.2 million to support what has become a growing need of children in state care, including the construction of new residential community care facilities; $22.1 million over four years to increase water rate concessions from 20 per cent to 25 per cent to help offset increased water prices; intensive support programs for families at risk to help parents and children deal with their challenges and stay together as a family at a cost of $19 million; and $1.8 million so that more than 2,000 eligible South Australians suffering from a medical condition affected by extreme hot or cold weather will benefit from the introduction of a medical heating and cooling concession.

As I have previously said, the real strength of this budget is that it delivers help to those who most need it. With the reduction of GST revenue to the state from the commonwealth, these are not booming times, the coffers are not overflowing; however, this budget is reasonable and responsible. As our Premier, Mike Rann, has said:

It is responsible borrowing to build the State for our children and grandchildren.

Our financial management has again been recognised by the ratings agencies, which have again given South Australia the internationally recognised AAA credit rating, the highest rating a Government can get.

It is a report card that shows this government is a responsible manager of the state's finances, while the measures included in the budget restate that this is also a government with a heart for its community and its people most in need.


[Sitting extended beyond 18:00 on motion of Hon. P. Caica]


Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (17:47): I would like to just say a few words today. I tabled a petition today with 984 signatures regarding stopping the car parking charges at the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre. The centre is a 150-bed facility that provides clinical rehab for people with traumatic brain injury, stroke, other neurological and medical disorders, spinal cord injury, orthopaedic conditions and amputations. It also has physical activity for the ageing, a special gym and exercise laboratory, and fitness testing and research. It has specially modified equipment and a hydrotherapy pool.

The Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre is not a standard hospital where you would expect to pay standard parking fees. I certainly understand that the Royal Adelaide Hospital and the Women's and Children's Hospital are in commercial areas where people might be inclined—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is a lot of background chat going on. Could members resume their seats or please leave the chamber, as the member for Adelaide does have the right to be heard. Thank you.

Ms SANDERSON: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, the Royal Adelaide Hospital and the Women's and Children's Hospital currently charge commercial rates for their parking, and that is a lot more understandable, given that they are in commercial areas and it would not be unlikely that, if they had free parking, city workers would park there and utilise the space. However, this is not the case at the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre. It is 10 kilometres north-east of the city, and it is certainly not likely to be somewhere you would drive to get good cheap parking.

One of my constituents, who had filled in a couple of pages of petition forms, told me that her husband, after a car accident injury, was in the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre for six months and that not only had they lost the only income in their household by him losing his job due to injury but she visited him every day, and the parking charge—it is expected to be $13 a day—would have been completely unaffordable for her.

I have had other constituents, elderly and retired people, who use the pool three times a week, and they see it as a way of keeping themselves fit and healthy and out of our hospital system. They are actually saving us money by looking after their bodies. To charge, I believe, $2 per hour will make it unaffordable for several of the gentleman whom I spoke to, which is certainly, I do not think, the intention of this government. I think it is penny-pinching and a very bad decision. The petition had over 900 signatures within two weeks. I think that there are a lot of people who are very upset and quite angry about this decision. I would implore the government to please reconsider and withdraw their intention to charge car parking fees at the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre.

I would also like to make a few comments on the budget as a whole. In particular, the thing that strikes me as quite outrageous, with my accounting background, is that you buy things when you can afford them. Whilst the Liberal Party supports football in the city, it is football in the city at the cost of our beautiful Adelaide Oval, and the destruction of the oval, bringing us from a two-oval city, which we have maintained for 30 years, down to one oval at a cost of $535 million—and that is without the footbridge, and without any suitable or adequate parking, and it will require parking on the Parklands. I have had hundreds of letters from people who are extremely upset about the parking on the Parklands. Even if we do park all over the Parklands, there are still not enough car parks for the expected crowd numbers. North Adelaide, I envisage, will become a car park, and it will be extremely inconvenient for the residents and business owners in the area.

I note that the only large concert that we have had at the Adelaide Oval in the last year or so was the AC/DC concert. As I have a business on Melbourne Street, I witnessed it first-hand. Now I know what to wear if I go to an AC/DC concert, because I saw hundreds of concertgoers walking past my office. It is basically black T-shirts, lots of black, with AC/DC written on them. From about 3.30 in the afternoon, way past the end of Melbourne Street—past the Lord Melbourne Hotel—there were streams of people walking past. Had any of my clients wanted to visit my store, or if anyone wanted to have a meal at the Lord Melbourne, or buy the paper at the newsagents, or get a coffee at the local coffee shop, nobody would be able to do that because the AC/DC concertgoers were parked in those parks. I envisage that will happen every weekend there is a football game on.

It is of detriment to the people in my electorate. As is well known, I am strongly opposed to the redevelopment at the site. I do believe it is a waste of money. It is not a suitable site. We already know that in terms of the western grandstand, even if you sit five rows back you actually get wet. We know that the lighting tower already has to be raised or moved because of the design. We already know that for the media unit to film from the western grandstand you are going to have to spend considerable extra money. We already know that there are not enough toilets. And this is on the you beaut redeveloped $85 million stand that is already within weeks of being open—already unsuitable for its purpose. This is an absolute waste of money. Is going to encroach on the Parklands on the eastern side by up to 15 metres. It is absolutely a bad decision.

That brings me also to the Royal Adelaide Hospital. Why would you forego a $1 billion-dollar asset, move down the end of the road away from the university medical school, the Hanson Research Centre, the Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, away from all of the convenient areas that work with it, and put it down the other end, where you are at a major intersection of Port Road, West Terrace and North Terrace. How will the ambulances get through? I have already had calls from ambulance drivers saying it is going to be absolutely chaotic at that intersection. So, I do not know how you going to get them there. There are lots of problems. There are obviously issues with contamination. I was sitting next to someone on a plane the other day who was telling me about the massive amounts of contamination on that site.

The cost is already something like $1.1 billion more than estimated, so it is already blowing out. The cost is outrageous for a hospital that we do not need. We already have a very good hospital that could be rebuilt on site, as the Liberal plan had, by demolishing buildings at the back of the site, building at the front and then moving things over.

It is a beautiful site and we would be retaining current world-class facilities such as the burns unit. It is also in the perfect location, right near the Botanical Gardens, which is wonderful for rehabilitation. We all know how important parklands are, which is why people are so upset about the redevelopment of Glenside, because the whole point of rehabilitating people is to have the parks and the serenity around them to help their mental health.

It is absolutely outrageous to be redeveloping Glenside to put a film hub there. I am from the modelling and acting industry and I can tell you that I have rung nearly everyone I know in the industry and they do not think it was even needed. It was an unnecessary waste of money on a site that was not appropriate. A warehouse in Port Adelaide would have been far more appropriate, if you are going to be putting together a film hub.

The site that the South Australian Film Corporation has at Hendon, which I have visited several times, is more than adequate for what they need. I am told that there is nothing extra that they are getting at this new facility. So, the government has again spent millions of taxpayers' money on a site that is unsuitable. It is an absolute waste of money on another monument to this government.

So, while the heating and cooling rebate is great, which was one of our initiatives, there is not much else in this budget that I can see that is very good for anyone in South Australia. If I did not love this state so much I would be inclined to maybe move to another state. Our taxes are incredibly high. It is very difficult to run a business in this state. Land taxes are high.

If you look at commercialrealestate.com you will see how many shops and offices are available on Melbourne Street, O'Connell Street and Prospect Road. There is something like 12 businesses empty for lease along Prospect Road with the redevelopment. There are a lot of empty buildings around here and the government needs to start looking at what it can do to help small business, because it is the largest employer in the state. There is not one mention of small business in this budget and how the government can help it, yet is a large employer in this state.

Mr BIGNELL (Mawson) (17:57): I critiqued my first budget in 1982. I know a lot of you would be thinking that I could not be old enough to have done that, but it was in fact the John Howard budget under Malcolm Fraser in 1982—beers and smokes up, from memory. I had to do that because—

Members interjecting:

Mr BIGNELL: I was 15 years old, in year 11, and my economics teacher, Kathy Snelling, the mother of the present Treasurer of South Australia, had all of us in class do a critique on the federal budget of 1982. I was glad to see Kathy in here the other day to watch her son hand down his first budget. I am sure it would have been a very proud moment for her and one that will be critiqued very well by her students of today.

The Treasurer has done a tremendous job in very difficult circumstances, given the global financial crisis and the reduction in GST revenues. It is a tight budget. It is a responsible budget. It is a budget that will look after the most vulnerable people in our community, and I commend the Treasurer for a great first budget and thank him.

There are some real standout things in this budget, such as the establishment of the Commissioner for Public Integrity and an associated public integrity office, and the continued spending on infrastructure, which is making a huge difference in the south in the electorate of Mawson. We are building the Noarlunga GP Plus super clinic, which should be completed by the end of this year, and we are doing that, of course, with the help of the federal government. We have the Flinders Medical Centre redevelopment, and there is $162 million going into that. As I mentioned, the other major infrastructure projects going into the south are the $445 million duplication of the Southern Expressway, a road that was the laughing stock of Australian transport systems, built by a Liberal government that thought it was a good idea to have a road that went one way half of the day and another way for the other half of the day, and closed for two hours a day for the changeover.

We are also making a huge difference to safety on the Victor Harbor Road at the intersection of Main Road at McLaren Vale where we are building an $18 million overpass to get people up and over the Victor Harbor Road and safely into the flow of traffic. Again, we are doing that in a cooperative agreement with the federal government.

Under the rail revitalisation program we will be re-sleepering, upgrading the rail tracks, and electrifying the train system, which will be fantastic. The federal government is extending the Noarlunga line down to Seaford. We are going to have new rolling stock as well. The ride in from Seaford on an express train will take about 35 minutes. It will be a cleaner, more comfortable, greener ride into the city, and, once the Adelaide Oval is redeveloped, I am sure people will flock in to watch AFL and cricket at the Adelaide Oval.

We are doing a targeted program of shoulder sealing around the south particularly in black spots and where we have had problems with accidents. The government has been listening. I know I am one of several Labor members in the south who are continually writing to the Minister for Road Safety and the Minister for Transport, urging them to turn their attention to spend some money in our area to make our roads safer, and we are very grateful for the money we are receiving.

I am particularly interested in country health and it is great to see the huge investment in this area. There was an increase on last year's spending, and there is going to be another increase this year in spending in the regions in South Australia. That is very important, as I have said over this week. A couple of weeks ago, I was up in Oodnadatta opening an $800,000 medical facility, and last weekend I opened two ambulance stations, each valued at $1.1 million, which were also contributed to by the local community. At Orroroo it was $230,000, and at Booleroo Centre, $300,000. We thank the local communities there for their contribution and for their willingness to work with us as a state government to try and deliver better health services for everyone across the state, no matter where they live.

I will leave my comments at that and congratulate the Treasurer once again on an outstanding budget.

Motion carried.

Estimates Committees

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING (Playford—Treasurer, Minister for Employment, Training and Further Education) (18:02): I move:

That the proposed expenditures for the departments and services contained in the Appropriation Bill be referred to Estimates Committees A and B for examination and report by Wednesday 6 July 2011, in accordance with the following timetables:

APPROPRIATION BILL

TIMETABLE FOR ESTIMATES COMMITTEES

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE A

29 June 2011-5 July 2011

WEDNESDAY 29 JUNE 2011 AT 9.00 AM

Treasurer

Minister for Employment, Training and Further Education

Department of Treasury and Finance (part)

Administered Items for the Department of Treasury and Finance (part)

Department of Further Education, Employment, Science and Technology (part)

Premier

Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change

Minister for Social Inclusion

Minister Assisting the Premier in Social Inclusion

Minister for Economic Development

Minister Assisting the Premier with the Olympic Dam Expansion Project

Minister for Arts

Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts

Minister Assisting the Premier with South Australia's Strategic Plan

Legislative Council

House of Assembly

Joint Parliamentary Services

State Governor's Establishment

Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Administered Items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Department of Trade and Economic Development (part)

Arts SA

Auditor-General's Department

THURSDAY 30 JUNE 2011 AT 9.00 AM

Minister for Health

Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse

Minister for the Southern Suburbs

Department of Health

Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

Administered Items for the Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

Minister for Families and Communities

Minister for Housing

Minister for Disability

Minister for Ageing

Department for Families and Communities

Administered Items for the Department for Families and Communities

FRIDAY 1 JULY 2011 AT 10.00 AM

Minister for Police

Minister for Defence Industries

Minister for Motor Sport

Minister for Emergency Services

South Australia Police (part)

Administered Items for South Australia Police (part)

Defence SA

Administered Items for the Department of Treasury and Finance (part)

MONDAY 4 JULY 2011 AT 10.00 AM

Minister for Small Business

Minister for Mineral Resources Development

Minister for Industry and Trade

Minister for Correctional Services

Department of Trade and Economic Development (part)

Department of Primary Industries and Resources (part)

Administered Items for the Department of Primary Industries and Resources (part)

Department for Correctional Services

TUESDAY 5 JULY 2011 AT 10.00 AM

Minister for Environment and Conservation

Minister for Water

Minister for the River Murray

Department for Environment and Natural Resources

Administered Items for the Department for Environment and Natural Resources

Environment Protection Authority

Department of Water

Administered Items for the Department of Water

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE B

29 June 2011-5 July 2011

WEDNESDAY 29 JUNE 2011 AT 9.00 AM

Minister for Infrastructure

Minister for Transport

Minister for State / Local Government Relations

Minister for Industrial Relations

Department of Treasury and Finance (part)

Administered Items for the Department of Treasury and Finance (part)

Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Administered Items for Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

Administered Items for the Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Administered Items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Attorney-General

Minister for Justice

Minister for Tourism

Minister for Food Marketing

Minister for Urban Development, Planning and The City of Adelaide

Attorney-General's Department (part)

Administered Items for the Attorney-General's Department (part)

Electoral Commission SA

Courts Administration Authority

South Australian Tourism Commission

Minister for Tourism

Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

Administered Items for the Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

THURSDAY 30 JUNE 2011 AT 9.00 AM

Minister for Education

Minister for Early Childhood Development

Minister for Science and Information Economy

Department of Education and Children's Services

Administered Items for the Department of Education and Children's Services

Department of Further Education, Employment, Science and Technology (part)

Minister for Volunteers

Minister for Multicultural Affairs

Minister for Youth

Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation

Attorney-General's Department (part)

Administered Items for the Attorney-General's Department (part)

Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Administered Items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

FRIDAY 1 JULY 2011 AT 10.00 AM

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries

Minister for Forests

Minister for Energy

Minister for Northern Suburbs

Department of Primary Industries and Resources (part)

Administered Items for the Department of Primary Industries and Resources (part)

Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Administered Items for Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

Administered Items for the Department for Planning and Local Government (part)

MONDAY 4 JULY 2011 AT 10.00 AM

Minister for Consumer Affairs

Minister for the Status of Women

Minister for Public Sector

Minister for Gambling

Minister for Government Enterprises

Minister for Regional Development

Attorney-General's Department (part)

Administered Items for the Attorney-General's Department (part)

Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Administered Items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet (part)

Independent Gambling Authority

Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Administered Items for the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Department of Trade and Economic Development (part)

TUESDAY 5 JULY 2011 AT 10.00 AM

Minister for Recreation, Racing and Sport

Minister for Veterans' Affairs

Minister for Road Safety

Attorney-General's Department (part)

Administered Items for the Attorney-General's Department (part)

Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

Administered Items for Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (part)

South Australia Police (part)

Administered Items for South Australia Police (part)

Motion carried.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING (Playford—Treasurer, Minister for Employment, Training and Further Education) (18:03): I move:

That Estimates Committee A be appointed, consisting of Ms Bedford, Hon. I.F. Evans, Ms Fox, Hon. S. Key, Mr van Holst Pellekaan, Mrs Vlahos and Mr Whetstone.

Motion carried.

The Hon. J.J. SNELLING (Playford—Treasurer, Minister for Employment, Training and Further Education) (18:03): I move:

That Estimates Committee B be appointed, consisting of Hon. M.J. Atkinson, Mr Gardner, Mr Griffiths, Mr Odenwalder, Ms Sanderson, Mr Sibbons and Hon. M.J. Wright.

Motion carried.

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