HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-04-30 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

SUPPLY BILL 2013

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 10 April 2013.)

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide) (17:55): I want to talk today about Port Adelaide—the place, the community and the football club. I have long seen the parallels between how we think and talk about the club and how we view the place and its community. Those parallels have become stronger for me over the year or so I have had the honour of representing the community in parliament and as our team has gone through hard times and started to emerge as the team to watch this year.

There are few places around the country that have the distinction of having an AFL team that is identified strongly and over many years with a specific community and the history of that community. The fact that many players do not come from that area and that many supporters do not either does not lessen the sense that the team Port Adelaide is of and for the port of Adelaide.

I want to talk today about a place and a community which get demonised by people who hardly know them and, sadly, by some who should know better, and a football team which cops the same range of emotions and attitudes. Port Adelaide the place is special to the first peoples of this country, and it is one of the oldest colonial settlements in South Australia. Its colonial and post-colonial history is obvious at every turn—buildings with a history which stretches back to the earliest years of the ships coming and building the state from the Port out.

Better even than that is the living history of the people who remember the changes over the past 60 or 80 years, who can tell me about the past uses of every building and each stage of change the Port has seen. And we have the ships—the Falie, the Yelta, both still in the inner harbour, still able to be seen by visitors and the beneficiaries of countless hours of volunteer labour keeping them looking good. We have newer ships, too, the One and All being one that many people are proud of, their having been involved in her building and operation over the past 28 years.

And the Port itself—the inner harbour and the suburb called Port Adelaide—is not the only treasured place known locally as the Port. People from Alberton, Rosewater and Cheltenham, and on the peninsula from Semaphore up to North Haven, will talk to me about being part of Port Adelaide. Those not within the electoral boundaries often tell me why they should be my constituents. I am conscious that I may be the member for Port Adelaide, but the members of Cheltenham and Lee have many constituents who consider themselves to be of and from the Port.

The mixed land use up the peninsula represents a particular challenge, and I have had cause to talk about that in this place before. This small area of land is home to thousands of people and one of the best stretches of beach in the metropolitan area. It is the place where people come to sail, compete in lifesaving, ride their bikes, walk the dog and enjoy the playgrounds and fish and chips at the seaside. It is truly one of the best places to live in the world, and I will never live anywhere else.

But it is also home to industry, some that date back as far as the oldest homes. With the move of freight shipping from the inner harbour to Outer Harbor, the peninsula houses South Australia's major port, with all the trucks and trains that implies. These bring their challenges for the locals, and we are constantly working to improve the local environment for the people who live there.

Wherever I go in this state, because I bear the title of the member for Port Adelaide, people will talk to me about their and their family's history in the Port Adelaide area—someone whose grandmother was born in Ethelton, or someone who was educated at the former Taperoo High School and who went on to run a hospital, or someone who got off the ship at Port Adelaide, the ship that brought them and their family to Australia to live.

For the last decade or so, my family and I have lived fairly near the former Lefevre hospital. and I have lost count of the number of people who tell me they were born there, including our own Premier. I never tire of hearing of these stories, because it is these stories, more than the buildings and even more than the ships, that make the Port area so very special—which brings me to my football team.

I know I cannot be too biased. Some people in the Port Adelaide electorate do not barrack for Port Power and, as their representative, I must respect that. In fact, I have to confess that one of my children refuses to be one-eyed and will go equally for the Crows, except during Showdown, of course. But for me it has always been the Port Adelaide Football Club, the last few years more than ever before. This is because the team is not just an AFL team in the eyes of my community: it is an extension of our community, and even of our families.

Like all good families, we are our own harshest critics. We like to give a metaphorical clip under the ear when we feel things are not going the way they should and, if we have a bad quarter, I am not sure the language near our seats in the outer is particularly family-friendly. Like families, we never doubt that we are bound together, this team and ourselves. As our team lifts and pulls together and shows the kind of belief in all the team members that we saw this weekend, it makes the community feel proud and inspired.

I have talked about the stories I hear across the city and the state about Port Adelaide from people who trace their roots there. I hear in their voices pride and fondness and a sort of lasting connection that makes them Port Adelaide Football Club supporters wherever they may now live. There is another kind of way of talking about the Port, though, and it is not so pretty. It talks the Port down. It says that the place is dead, it is dirty, it is full of pigeons and it is dangerous: it is full of scary people you would not want to meet on a dark night. This same talk about our football club says we are rough and violent and thuggish. This talk is nonsense.

This talk loves to point to every challenge we have and ignores all the hard work and stories of success we have right now, and I have no time for it. I do not ignore the challenges and I know that we have some things that need to change quickly and require strong talk and tough action. Making sure Incitec Pivot is not a danger to people living and working in the Port and does not depress investment requires this kind of hard work, but it is not an invitation to jump on the radio and talk the Port down, to throw up our hands in despair and say that nothing good will ever happen.

Just as the Port Adelaide Football Club has dug deep and built itself up from some hard days, putting all the pieces together steadily and with belief in itself, the Port Adelaide community is pulling together to find the emerging place around the Inner Harbour that is not a major port any more and is not a place just for industry. It is a residential, tourism, Kaurna, artistic, maritime, student, dolphin-watching, cafe and small business hub. It is becoming, again, the most special place in Adelaide with the most character and the most opportunity.

The government is working with the community and the local council to crystallise what that emerging place is through a plan that will lead to an amendment of the development plan to guide private investment in a way that the community wants to see. We are bringing back to life some of the places that have been neglected for the past few years, like around the Adelaide Milling Company, and connecting places to allow people to walk or cycle around the Inner Harbour and into Semaphore. We are encouraging boating life by bringing the One and All alongside the Falie on North Parade Wharf, by opening up the pontoons on Dock 1 for people to overnight, by building Cruickshank's Sands for the rowing club to compete on in the Inner Harbour, and we are working with the Port Adelaide Chamber of Commerce (the oldest in South Australia, I believe) to bring free wi-fi to the Port.

I was on the radio a few weeks ago and the interviewer hearing this list of actions seemed to want to dismiss them as pretty everyday stuff. Well, you know what? That's how you build a community or a football club. There is no magic bullet—wave your wand and, suddenly, you have utopia. Pulling a community together is just the logical step-by-step work that makes sense to people. I have a view that nothing really good happens overnight. Good work takes time, effort and application, step by step. You do one thing that works and you build on to the next thing. Something doesn't work so you try again.

I tell you the slogan that works most for me, that brings a lump to my throat when I am at the footy, is the simplest one a club can have. It says simply, 'We are Port Adelaide.' With those few words, a wealth of history, pride and commitment is expressed. We are Port Adelaide.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (18:03): I rise to speak on the Supply Bill which, as members would be aware, is for the appropriation of money from the Consolidation Account for the financial year ending 30 June 2014.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are you the lead speaker?

Ms CHAPMAN: I should indicate that our leader, the member for Norwood, will be the leading and, no doubt, outstanding speaker on this bill, and I am just a mere Indian following the chief. May I say that, as is customary, for the first three months of the financial year we need to make an appropriation of funding for the payment of loyal public servants and, this year, the Supply Bill proposes $3,205,000.

As members would know, this is to cover the anticipated period necessary pending the passage of the budget bill by which this parliament approves the government's expenditure for that financial year. We ought to use this time each year to reflect on the preceding 12 months and have some understanding of where we are at. In reviewing the year, I felt like I was about to go in and change my will and find that the cupboard was bare and wonder as to who I might possibly leave a legacy or a bequest to and what on earth they would get. It is a bit like opening the cupboard and the cobwebs are sitting there to face you.

Regrettably, the position is after six out of seven years of deficit by this government, a staggering increase in debt level to the anticipated $14 billion liability that we leave as the legacy to our children. If that is not enough to horrify members, then one only has to look at the over $2 million a day service cost to that debt. It is not surprising to me—I think it is textbook Labor management—that they spend the money, they run up the debt, they exhaust all avenues that are available, then they leave us in a parlous and impecunious state.

This is not unusual. It has been repeated through history, so I am not surprised by it. I am staggered this time around at the level to which it has got and I am alarmed at the lack of asset that is left to be able to provide some secure fiscal management for the state and also to, in some ways, arrest the liability that is accruing. In other words, there is limited asset left to be able to sell.

In the last 12 months there have been announcements of the sale of significant assets. Out there for sale is the property owned by the government at Netley, the State Administration Centre and this, of course, includes the building where the Premier is selling his own home. They have sold the forests, on all assessments except their own, apparently at far less value than they should have, the lotteries has been sold and we are left with what? We are left with a significant level of South Australian housing stock.

South Australia has a very proud history of its development of housing for those who are unable to afford to buy or privately rent and I think it is a tragedy, when I pick up the Mid-Year Budget Review, to find that there is little left in the larder to be able to provide. In addition to that, they have recently reviewed the establishment, under Renewal SA, and the transfer of significant personnel from Housing SA and they have been vested with a charter which will clearly have a fire sale on our stock.

There is significant asset in SA Water, such as reservoirs and pipelines. There is the mothballed multibillion dollar desalination plant. Who knows what is going to happen to that? There are some pockets of asset left in this state and it is concerning to me that, coupled with this, there is a massive (something like 250 per cent) increase in the cost of water in this state; a massive 25 per cent just in May 2012, which was snuck in without the disclosure at that stage of the anticipated mothballing of the asset. So, we are really in a very desperate situation.

As I say, predictable under this government, but nevertheless with little options as to how this can be managed, but the Liberals are up for the job. We understand that the government is saying, 'Well, we will cancel some projects.' That is what they did last year with the Gawler electrification project. The poles are up, but there are no wires on them. You will see that as an unfinished example of a half project done: tens of millions of dollars spent and now it is just waving in the wind, languishing like tombstones.

Then we have a level of exposed incompetence, not the least of which is the contract that the government entered into initially under the supervision of the member for Elder, who was then the Minister for Transport, and then shortly after that by the member for Bright, who is now the Minister for Transport Services, and under her watch in the last 12 months we have seen a major level of breakdown of buses. Over 2,000 buses have broken down in the preceding year. The patronage had been shattered over a $2.4 million drop in the number of passengers who caught buses.

This is clearly a reflection on the bus on-time data, which confirmed that, particularly in the north-south services, only 57 per cent of buses ran on time. The complaints exploded to a situation where there were over 350 complaints a day. The minister told the department she simply would not focus on the complaints. We have had massive levels of train fare evasion, so that 20 per cent of passengers on Adelaide trains did not even pay for their ticket. Then of course we have had the complete debacle over the Noarlunga, Tonsley and Grange closures during the electrification, and all the issues that followed.

Most recently, the contracting party, Transfield, transferred eight of its routes across to another provider, namely Torrens Transit, under a deal which took $150,000 in taxpayers' money from the party that were apparently failing in providing those lines of service and another $2 million handed over by the minister in the other hand to the new providers, with 16 buses, to provide exactly the same service that had been contracted in 2011.

The situation is despairing, yet in the parliament we have heard repeatedly the pride of the government, apparently, in investing in public transport. The shattering statistics that go with it are evidence to us that, unfortunately, even with the tens of millions of dollars they have been investing in infrastructure, we actually have fewer people going on the buses and a poorer service, and it obviously has a shattering impact on our budget to be able to manage it.

I also bring to the parliament's attention the attempt by the government to raise more revenue. This is a textbook Wayne Swan policy or approach: when you are in a financial haemorrhage, what you do is just go and get more money. And how do you get more money? Well, one of the ways of course is to increase taxes. We have had the announcement by the government of a car park tax.

Today that is qualified by the Premier as being something that is still apparently in consultation and that its final model has not been determined. It is pretty clear the government has not done the modelling to support the claims that they are going to provide increased support for public transport as a result. Apparently that is going to be its positive effect. There is absolutely no data to support that.

In addition, we find that in the budget for this financial year we already have the provision of park-and-ride services, which the government have now come out and announced are going to be paid for by a tax that they are going to introduce a year after they have completed the projects. That is just inconsistent entirely with the claim that this initiative of the car park tax was to have some demonstrable positive effect of getting people out of their cars and into public transport and providing the infrastructure to go with that. In fact, what it is is a tax to prop up this enormous black hole.

The other thing that I found, which was a most disturbing revelation, was that when we review some of the tax costs that are currently imposed we see the real trickery of this government. I am sure that the Speaker would not have heard of this issue yet, and if he had I am sure that he would be as alarmed as I am, as would be his constituents whom this would affect. I discovered recently some issues in respect of the plant registration fee, and for members who are not aware of this, it is a fee that is charged by SafeWork SA for registration and approval processes.

Under the Dangerous Substances Act and the Explosives Act there are work health and safety requirements. In particular, on the latter there is a plant registration fee. It applies to all pieces of equipment in the categories of amusement structures, lifts, boilers, pressure vessels, mobile cranes, tower cranes, building maintenance units, and concrete placement units.

Members would have some understanding of what this is. It is not the trucks on wheels. It is the pieces of equipment—they include lifts in people's private homes—and until this year, the government would charge, through SafeWork SA, a fee of about $60 for each piece of equipment. This is just to simply keep it on a register. It would be approved like a car registration; it is an annual renewal.

This year the government has issued invoices to everyone who owns these things—as you can imagine, there must be thousands of them across the state—a notice for $310. When one person who complained to me about this contacted SafeWork SA, they were told, 'This is because we are now charging you for five years of registration upfront.' Five years of registration upfront! 'How is this to be?' 'Oh, we sent you a notice last year.' He said to me, 'I get all the notices; I haven't received any notice of advice of this. Had I not even called, it wasn't disclosed on the invoice about what is now the case. There is no discount for paying five years in advance. There is no option available to me to pay one year.'

I said to him, 'Obviously, in this case you have a mobile crane. This is a payment you will have to make. Did you inquire as to whether you might get a refund if you don't get any work this year, given that the building industry is practically on its knees?' He said, 'Actually, I did, and they said, "You could apply again and get some refund if you were to sell the piece of equipment, but if you simply don't use it in the hope that you might be able to get some work in this following year, then you don't get the refund".'

We have a situation where, so desperate is the government to fill that black hole, it is prepared to issue a notice to people for a five-year obligation to pay their registration. There are no options, no discount; you pay, otherwise you cannot use this equipment. That was snuck in in the last lot of regulations under the Work Health and Safety Act 2012. I hate to think how many other opportunities the government might have implemented to rape and pillage those who are on their knees financially.

We have had the Premier come into this house and claim to us that it was necessary to introduce stamp duty exemptions within the Adelaide district, including a little extra area of Walkerville and Bowden, to enable the housing industry, which had had a major conference with the Premier about how desperate the situation was in respect of housing and building construction in this state. The property circumstances are poor; we know because the data tells us. There is a 27 per cent drop in one of the property statistics this year.

That is a very concerning circumstance for the state. We listen to that, and yet while the Premier is saying, 'I'm here for small business, I'm here to protect, promote and support the jobs in small business. I'm here to give them a go. I will make these concessions,' on the other hand he is pulling away this money when the people are in the most difficulty in their financial circumstances.

I am very concerned about this. I have spoken to other people in the industry. The government and their representatives are presenting to people in the industry their sympathy, their concern, their commitment to provide support, especially in a circumstance where the government has spruiked a financial future for the state which was going to be all rosy. We were going to have 25,000 jobs with BHP. We were going to have defence contracts come through; the Prime Minister still has not signed up to that.

We have a situation where the state is in a stagnant position, in a quite parlous financial position, and we have a premier who is saying, 'I'm here to help the little person. I'm here to help small business,' when in fact he is raping and pillaging their pockets to prop up a deficit which is of his own making. He, of course, alone has taken on the responsibility and decided that he is the best person in the Australian Labor Party parliamentary team to take on control of the financial accounts.

The situation of employment, of the balancing of the financial budget, of the debt level and of the AAA credit rating (which, of course, has plummeted), all of these indicators have gone south. All of these indicators have told us as South Australian parliamentary representatives that we have a serious situation facing South Australians and our electors and we need to be able to act as soon as possible.

Regrettably, we have about another 315 days before the people of South Australia can do anything about it electorally, but, in the meantime, be rest assured that, on this side of the house, we will be making sure that the public are well aware of the nightmare that the government has left them with. If they are writing out their wills for their children and their grandchildren, they will find as well that what has been left is very little and that it is now under attack.

I just want to say that, at the federal level, relief is on its way, of course, with the opportunity for the people of Australia to change the government. People can have different views about whether carbon taxes or mining taxes are appropriate or important or revolutionary policy. My concern is that, under the Julia Gillard/Wayne Swan formula, again, when they get into trouble, they just promise more, they just offer more debt to support the positive news of support—for example, to those who are disabled—and then they make announcements to say they are only going to rob from the rich and give to the poor, such as with the superannuation reform.

South Australians, both as members of the Australian community and under this state government, are under serious financial pressure. Their savings are being raided and their capacity to be able to continue to operate in the 140,000-odd small businesses in this state has been diminished. The opportunity for their children to have jobs, of course, is ever shrinking, so they look to broader horizons to give themselves some chance in life.

I indicate that the opposition will be supporting the bill so that the state public offices can continue to function, which is important, but we will be on the lookout for all of these, I think, sneaky, underhanded tax initiatives that the government is obviously trying to use to prop up this financial position which they have got themselves into and they are leaving us with the most disgraceful legacy.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (18:23): I too rise to speak on the Supply Bill 2013, and I have some real concerns. It is not just about the way that the state is being run but about how the regions are suffering under a government that is continually centralising services, centralising mainstream support bases and centralising, I think in the mainstream, everything that takes away productivity and confidence in the regions.

It was almost 12 months ago when I stood in this place to speak on the Supply Bill, and it is with great pain that I stand here again today to reiterate my sentiments. I conveyed a year ago the dire state of the budget and the effect it is having on our regions.

I am a passionate regional South Australian. I represent the region of Chaffey, which takes in the River Murray, east of the River Murray to the Victorian border. We are continually under siege with a high Australian dollar—and no, a state government cannot impact on the high Australian dollar.

We are impacted on by commodity prices and, no, a state government does not have a lot to contribute to changing those commodity prices. It is about the cost of doing business, it is about the cost of regulation, it is about the cost of doing the business that we do, about growing food, and about supplying a domestic market that puts food on everyone's table. Everyone in this chamber—not many of us here this evening—when we sit down to our meals, the majority of that food comes out of the Murray-Darling Basin and, proudly, the Chaffey electorate is a critical part of that, particularly here in South Australia. We are, in many cases, the engine room to food production.

Before I go on and touch on primary production, as we have already heard from the member for Bragg, the deputy leader, South Australia has reached a number of firsts in the past 12 months. We have heard about the highest debt in the state's history. We hear about the highest budget deficit in the state's history. We hear about Australia's worst credit rating and, of course, how can we forget some of the nation's highest taxes? We look at land tax, we look at payroll tax, we look at WorkCover. I think WorkCover is one of those issues that need to be addressed. For far too long this state government has continually almost irrigated and fertilised a WorkCover system that is becoming unsustainable.

Not only do we have these broken records, we also have a number of other ominous circumstances, obviously including the dramatic increase in the cost of living. The cost of living is probably going to be the number one issue leading up to the state election in 2014, and for anyone here to say that the cost of living is not an issue in their home, or in their electorates, they are kidding themselves. It really is something that is starting to bite at every household budget and it has people talking.

In general conversation, whether you are out at a function, whether you are talking to people individually and, often, when door knocking, I ask people what is their biggest concern. It is, of course, the cost of living. It is the cost of putting food on the table; it is the cost of being able to pay for those utility prices; it is the cost of owning a business, paying that land tax; it is the cost of just general life here in South Australia, and it really is becoming the number one topic.

Again, rises in water and electricity prices have been very well documented. We look at why those electricity prices are so high. We look at why the water prices are the highest in the nation. We look at having diversity away from the River Murray. We look at how the government made a decision on accepting a 50 gigalitre desalination plant and, back then, this current state government was a denier on stormwater harvesting.

I think in a debate in here one day—and I am sure that you, Mr Speaker, were sitting over in the benches—and we were doing some robust bickering about stormwater, and I made the comment that all water here in South Australia is stormwater; whether it is the River Murray, whether it is in your rainwater tank, or whether it is water into our reservoirs, it is stormwater. I think that is something that needs to be further addressed. I acknowledge that the government has looked at stormwater reuse and is putting money towards it, but we have also increased the desal plant by two.

In the state government's wisdom, it was led into a dark corner, because to receive funding for a 50 gigalitre desalination plant, I think, was justifiable. It was a good investment in the diversity of our water supply, but to double the investment into the desalination plant was simply short-sighted, and you were looking at the candy and you were not looking at exactly what the reality was. Again, we are dealing with fewer jobs and the cost of living. The cost of doing business here in South Australia is creating less jobs, it is creating less certainty, and it is not creating an environment that we here in South Australia desperately need.

We have had the blow of some mining announcements, such as Olympic Dam. The expansion of exploration in the mining industry has been touted for some years now and, all of a sudden, we have the Premier coming out and saying that we are in a mining boom and we are moving on with this mining boom. The mining boom is not here with us today. The mining boom has passed. I am sure that the Premier and the minister for mining will be addressing the mining sector across the road tonight, and they will receive a very firm message from the mining sector that things are not rosy. It is not only about the mining industry: it is about the support mechanisms, the support industries around mining. They are doing it tough. Consultants are doing it tough.

I was speaking with Consult Australia this morning. It is laying off more people than anyone. It has laid off just over 1,000 people in recent times, yet look at how our state and federal governments are propping up Holden. They are propping up something that is seen to be a worthwhile exercise and yet we have one industry that revolves around infrastructure and mining and it has just laid off 1,000 people. I did not hear any front-line stories on that. I did not hear the Premier come out and say that he is going to support the consulting industry or any of those service industries that should be there and should be supported.

Again, if we look back at the nineties, those industries will be gone; those service industries will not be there: they will have travelled back interstate where they have come from. They will be looking further afield overseas, looking at exactly how they can secure jobs and secure what they need to get on with life. That would leave South Australia depleted of not only consultants, engineers and architects, but of a workforce that is critical for prosperity and for moving on.

One day, when we see these big infrastructure projects take hold, or the mining industry take another hold, we will not have those support industries here to help. So I guess the message is that all people across South Australia are hurting, and it is thanks to our state Labor government and its charter. Its charter at the moment is overspending and overspruiking. It is out there selling a story that does not have any credibility to back it up. South Australia is hurting. Potentially it is a city centric ideology that if we support the city metropolitan seats everything will be alright. I can tell you that everything is not alright. The last 12 months have been more of the same: more spending and more mismanagement, particularly waste.

We have departments that are overstaffed and overregulated. To get around all of the overregulation, overspending and under-management of these departments, we need to support industries in our economic sector. We just see a void, and that greatly worries me for the future of our state. We will not have the skilled services there.

A serious flaw of this state government has been its inability to prioritise. We have seen the $40 million that is about to be spent on a footbridge. It is not about the footbridge: it is about the priority of spending. It is about where we need to spend that $40 million first. Do we need to spend it on a bridge or do we need to spend it on trying to excite or stimulate infrastructure investment? I will leave that thought with you.

We see the upcoming mothballing of a long-heralded desalination plant. That desalination plant has had another significant impact on exactly what utility costs are doing to every household budget, and water has probably one of the biggest impacts. When every householder gets their water bills, they shudder. In a lot of instances I speak to people who are not my constituents in Adelaide. They spend a lot of time on the phone deferring payments, finding other ways to stagger payment of their water and electricity bills. This really is a sad indictment; the priorities of the government are all wrong.

We hear the Premier spruiking about a water rebate that is going to help everybody's water bill and the cost of living. Well, I can tell you that that water rebate is only for some. For many people living in country electorates, particularly in my electorate of Chaffey, country living house blocks do not get the rebate; so it is good for some but it is not good for others. Those blocks have the same criteria for how their water is delivered. It is filtered water and it is delivered to their home, but because they live on a country block they are not eligible for a rebate; so it is good for some but not good for others. This just goes to show the priorities of this current government.

The current government is racking up over $200 million annually on consultants and contractors, which I have already touched on. That industry is putting off more people than the government cares to even talk about. They are an industry that is not out there highlighting, spruiking, that unless we have this industry, unless we have government support, we are gone. Well, it looks like a lot of this industry has gone. We do not see the government putting in huge buckets of money to underpin a manufacturing industry that needs to be held accountable. They need to give an explanation of just exactly what their long-term vision is and how that money is going to improve not only opportunities for employment, for the economy of this state, but how it is going to be of benefit for the future of this state and our economy.

The government is spending around $75 million annually on advertising. It is not about advertising the economy, it is not advertising for the betterment of the state. The advertising is all about justification for government decisions. It is advertising why we are going to have these sanctuary zones and why we have got this magnificent desalination plant that we are about to close up in a minute. Please tell me: what are we spending $75 million on? That's right, we are spending it on the government brand. I think that the government's priorities—and I come back to this word again—on this advertising are just outrageous.

We are spending $25 million annually on overseas travel. We continually hear about the trips to China and what it is going to bring. Well, we are yet to see what it is actually going to bring, what tangible outcomes. It is all very well to do the fuzzy meetings, the big cocktail briefings and rub shoulders with our overseas markets, but what are we actually getting out of it? We are getting exposure, but we are not getting concrete, grassroots outcomes, and that is something that really does concern me, considering that I have been an exporter out of the Riverland with wine grapes and citrus for many years. It is about getting out there and doing it yourself; it is not about governments going out there and getting in the way.

While this government has been flip-flopping over projects and costs and squandering money, rural and regional areas have been suffering. They tend to do a lot of it for themselves, but they are suffering. It is timely that this week I will speak on the member for Frome's motion urging the state government to completely review the PAT scheme. That is an area where the constituents of regional electorates are doing it tough. For people in the regions to visit a hospital, because their hospital has either been destaffed, defunded, they have to take time off work, they have to organise themselves, they have to organise someone to help them travel to Adelaide to health providers, and it is a huge cost.

Not only are they taking time off work, taking someone to care for them down to Adelaide, it is the cost of getting to Adelaide, the cost of fuel, the cost of accommodation. It is something that has been overlooked for far too long. As I said, it is timely that this scheme is reviewed; it is long overdue. Again, I understand that the impact of centralisation on health services in country areas is taking away the fabric of these country hospitals.

I have much to say, but I know that tonight all of us on this side, the opposition, have much angst about the way this state is being run. It really is a sad indictment, whether we are talking about credit ratings, exactly how the money is being spent, or AQIS inspection fees. The state government has just supported fees that have gone from $500 to $8,500 and that simply shuts out small business in horticulture because they cannot afford to export on a small scale.

It is outrageous. Those increased inspection fees will mean an end to a lot of small businesses in the electorate. We have over 4,000 small businesses in Chaffey that directly or indirectly rely on exporting, and for the current state and federal governments to cut them off at the knees is just another example of what they are doing to this state's economy.

I would like to briefly touch on fruit fly. Being fruit fly free is something that this state is regarded highly for in terms of our export markets; our pride in being fruit fly free is something that nationally no other state can boast. South Australia carries that mantle, and it is something this government needs to be proactive on. It needs to reassess exactly where its priorities are, it needs to look at putting funding in place to nurture that feather in the cap we have.

In closing, I would, sadly, like to touch on the quality of our country roads. Country roads are a major issue in regional electorates, and it really is a case of country roads being out of sight and out of mind. That squeaky wheel, country roads, needs to be addressed. We look at road tolls, we look at the young on our country roads, and we look at the statistics that tell us that country roads are claiming many lives.

It is not just about the education process, it is not just about government slowing down speed, and speed restrictions. It is about repairing the roads, it is about putting money into funding to get those roads fixed so that they are safe, so that our young and uninitiated drivers can get out there and drive on safe roads that will enable them to have a long and extended driving career. I think I will save my further comments for, perhaps, an adjournment grieve.

Ms BETTISON (Ramsay) (18:43): I rise today to support the Supply Bill 2013 and highlight the government's key priorities in the 2012-13 budget. The budget was delivered against a backdrop of uncertain global and domestic economic conditions lingering from the global financial crisis. The widespread loss of consumer and market sentiment associated with the economic downturn has translated into significant and successive revenue writedowns of over $3 billion since the 2011-12 budget.

Nevertheless, we have continued to provide additional funding to support areas of need, including disability, communities, health, child development, transport and infrastructure. In the budget, the government prioritised funding of $210.2 million over four years to help those most in need. This sum included $101.6 million over four years to provide additional support for disability clients needing accommodation support, community support, community access and respite services for carers. On this point, I note that during my doorknocking, particularly during the by-election, many times I spoke to people who had adult children with high disability needs. They talked to me about the different levels of support that we would need, and I am very proud that this government was able to provide this additional support.

There was $61.5 million over four years in capital grant funding to the South Australian Housing Trust for the construction of new community based disability housing. One of the key concerns about older people with children or adult children with disability is where they are going to be living when they are older. This is of grave concern to them as they are getting older themselves and unable to look after them. There was $21.6 million over four years to transition all remaining residents accommodated at the Strathmont Centre into community living arrangements and $20 million over three years for the National Disability Insurance Scheme launch.

The Department of Health is expected to reach record operational spending levels of about $4.9 billion in 2012-13 and to help cater for the demand in the health system and support the state's hardworking doctors and nurses, the government announced $183.1 million over four years to provide additional resourcing in the public health system and to support the increased cost and volume of services including nurses, doctors and other health professionals. To support their work there was $30.4 million over two years for the implementation of a singe Enterprise Pathology Laboratory System across the department with the intention of generating operational efficiencies in the processing of tests, storage of results and delivery of pathology results.

This government remains dedicated to helping our most vulnerable with an extra $23.1 million in funding over four years for the budget with initiatives including $19.8 million over four years to continue to meet the growth in children requiring alternative care and $3.3 million over four years for a program to support vulnerable families with infants and young children. What is important is that in a time of global financial crisis this government made a conscious decision to continue our record capital investment in the state's social and economic infrastructure with the clear intention of supporting South Australian jobs and boosting the economy.

Our historically high levels of investment in infrastructure continued in the 2012-13 budget with about $8.3 billion of expenditure in key infrastructure over the next four years. Major expenditures include $230 million for the South Road Superway, the state's biggest individual road project; $165.5 million for the Southern Expressway duplication project; $135.8 million for electrification of the Noarlunga line as well as station upgrades; upgrades to the Goodwood and Torrens Rail Junctions; $98 million for the 100 gigalitres desalination plant and pipeline to the Happy Valley Treatment Plant.

We also saw significant investment to improve connectivity between northern and southern metropolitan water supply systems; and $76.3 million for the development of the Sustainable Industries Education Centre at Tonsley Park. In the 2012-13 Mid-Year Budget Review we built on our earlier commitments in the 2012-13 budget by providing further funding of $40.3 million over four years to provide more resources for our most vulnerable children requiring alternative care arrangements. The government also made a commitment to pay its fair share of costs under the Equal Remuneration Order covering those working in the social and community services sector.

We also acknowledged that our property sector was soft and the housing construction industry had been facing tough conditions. With this sector employing about 60,000 workers, the government took decisive action to boost the industry by introducing reforms to its housing assistance grants. These reforms included an increase in the First Home Owner Grant from $7,000 to $15,000 for first home owners building or purchasing a new home from 15 October 2012. The reform package also included an $8,500 Housing Construction Grant for all eligible buyers of new homes until 30 June 2013.

This government has not forgotten about businesses and investors in South Australia. That is why we have delivered significant taxation relief in both land and payroll tax to ease the burden on businesses and investors in our state. In fact, the total cumulative value of payroll tax relief provided by this government since 2004 is estimated to exceed $1 billion. The total cumulative land tax relief provided by this government is estimated to total nearly $950 million by 2012-13. While all these measures are necessary, the government remains committed to fiscal sustainability.

We have introduced a significant package of savings measures in an effort to restore the budget position. These measures will reduce the level of our debt by $6 billion by 2015-16. We have met our savings target to date, and we are currently on track to deliver the remaining savings, despite some challenges in Health. These measures reflect those of a financially responsible government. It is essential that the Supply Bill is passed so that we can continue to use resources to look after the most vulnerable in our society and invest in projects that provide a strong economy for all South Australians.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Gardner.

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