HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-02-06 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

PUBLIC SECTOR

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide) (14:09): My question is to the Premier. How is the government renewing the South Australian public sector and how does this differ from other proposals?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Treasurer, Minister for State Development, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for the Arts) (14:09): I thank the honourable member for her question, and anticipate that she may be soon assisting me in this task of renewing the state public sector. On this side of the house, we are committed to a public sector which, in partnership with the private sector, facilitates growth and provides the services that support people, especially in times of greatest need.

The importance for us staying this course in uncertain economic times is even more important, Mr Speaker. The challenges of achieving it during a period of falling revenues is of course great, and that is why we need to respond to these continuing demands that the community makes for better services with fewer resources to do so.

This can only be addressed by doing new things—thinking about new ways in which we can deliver services. That is why we have established the public sector renewal project, or what we are calling 'Change at SA', under the supervision of a steering committee led by Mr Raymond Spencer, a well-respected businessman who has undertaken important reforms of international organisations.

Mrs Redmond interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I call the member for Heysen to order.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Mr Speaker, as part of this project, we have chosen five 90-day projects which are designed to catalyse these changes. They include ensuring healthy patients are discharged from hospitals sooner, getting more police on the beat by reducing paperwork, and making school community hubs for healthcare services for children and families. These projects will realise real benefits to services in themselves, but equally more importantly, they will create new skills and capabilities in our public servants as part of these projects.

These projects will be replicated across the whole of the public sector over the next year until sustained culture change occurs. These changes are underpinned by a set of values which I have released today for further discussion, and I encourage all those who have an interest in this topic to put their ideas forward.

Labor's view about the public sector is clear: the public sector is an asset to be valued, not a burden to be minimised. That is why we are investing in this project to make the public sector more effective, and to get better outcomes for our community. In contrast to those opposite, who have one policy—

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Point of order.

The SPEAKER: Point of order from the member for Stuart.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Mr Speaker, the Premier is embarking upon debate.

The SPEAKER: No, member for Stuart; the Premier is answering the substance of the question and I call you to order, because that is an abuse of the right to take points of order. Premier.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In contrast, those opposite have only one policy about the public sector, and that is to make it a—

Members interjecting:

Ms CHAPMAN: Mr Speaker, if your—

The SPEAKER: Is this a point of order?

Ms CHAPMAN: It is a point of clarification. Your ruling indicated that because the question had 'and will you contrast that with other policy proposals or other options available', or words to that effect, that gives some licence to the government to bring into their response some deluge of claim about what the opposition's position is, which is clearly within our rules debating the matter in breach of standing order 98. I would seek some clarification of that, because to simply try and pervert the rules by claiming to answer in comparison with other policies or proposals as a means of attacking the opposition on its alleged policies would be a complete abuse of the process of the parliament. So, I just seek your clarification on that.

The SPEAKER: The point is a fair point. The Premier is not responsible to the house for the policies of the opposition, but there is scope to compare and contrast policies and give information—information—about what the two policies are and how they contrast, but to do so without debating.

Ms CHAPMAN: Thank you.

The SPEAKER: Premier.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Can I say that, in contrast, those opposite have one policy about the public sector, which is to make it drastically smaller. Now—

Members interjecting:

Ms CHAPMAN: Point of order.

The SPEAKER: No, would the member for Bragg and the Premier be seated. It is simply not a point of order to get up and say, 'I disagree with the Premier'—

Ms Chapman: I didn't say that; I hadn't even started.

The SPEAKER: —or that the Premier's answer is not factual. If the Premier's answer is not factual, you deal with that by substantive motion. Premier.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you, Mr Speaker. There is an ideological view, which is a conservative ideological view, that the private sector is good and the public sector should get out of the way. That is the simple proposition.

Ms Chapman: Don't mislead the house.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: The progressive view of a modern economy is that there is an interaction between the two sectors, which is fundamental to the prosperity of our community. If you want some factual information we can supply it. We had the Leader of the Opposition quoted as saying—

Mr PENGILLY: Point of order, sir: standing order 98—debate. The Premier is once again debating.

The SPEAKER: No; the Premier is presenting information that is answering the substance of the question, which was quite explicit, about comparing policies. Now, if the Premier misleads the house, as the member for Bragg was (out of order) interjecting, then there is a remedy for that, and it is not to take a point of order. Premier.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We have the Leader of the Opposition saying, 'We have no specific plans within the Liberal Party to axe Public Service jobs,' and then he says, 'I'm not saying there will be no Public Service cuts.' So, let's match those two things: there are no plans by the Liberals but there might be public sector cuts. So, who is going to make these cuts? Who is going to make these Public Service cuts? Is it the audit commission?

Ms CHAPMAN: Point of order. I do rely on standing order 98, and in doing so can I put this to you: you have given the Premier permission in your ruling to outline facts as he asserts them and to deal with it in a different way if we consider that to be misleading or otherwise; but to then go on and offer opinion, which is explicitly prohibited under standing order 98, and to enter the debate is in breach of that standing order. It is one thing to say it is asserted that such and such occurred as a fact, and we will do with it as you suggest and as you, wise counsel, have given. However, to then start contrasting those in an argument about what is good and what is bad and express an opinion is explicitly prohibited under standing order 98.

The SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Bragg. I would say to the Premier that he is free to offer the house information about the opposition's policies on this matter but not to debate the matter. The Premier.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: I will conclude with this remark: what we need is an intelligent debate about the quality of the Public Service, not a mindless debate about its size.

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