HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)
2014-06-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Regional Development Australia

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (11:48): I move:

That this house strongly urges the regional development minister, in conjunction with the state government to—

(a) provide adequate core funding for the ongoing operations of the seven Regional Development Australia (RDA) committees in South Australia;

(b) ensure that the operational funding of the RDA network is provided annually on an uncontested basis; and

(c) ensure that the federal government commitment of $80.9 million in operational funding to the RDA network across the nation is recognised.

It is a pleasure to bring this motion before the house. I hope that the Minister for Regional Development contributes to the debate. The genesis of the motion goes back some time, and for me it all stems from a decision made, I believe, in the 2010 budget, which was some months after the state election, when it was flagged that from June of 2013 additional funding would not be provided by the state government to the Regional Development Australia network.

It is fair to say that that created a lot of frustration with me, as a person who has lived in the regions all their life, who has been involved with several of the regional development boards, as they were then, and who is supportive of the Regional Development Australia network as it exists now. The critical component of funding, which was part of a tripartite agreement where there were federal, state and local government contributions towards it, I believe was placed at risk by deciding to withdraw that one critical component, which I believe was equal to $4.083 million per year.

During estimates in this very chamber, I asked the Hon. Michael O'Brien, as the minister responsible at that time, questions about this budget. We went for some time, asking questions about the decision that was made—there was a fair level of warning, and I can understand that—to remove that dollar figure. After about 15 minutes (and I think this is a direct quote), I had to use the words, 'It's time for us to move on, minister, because if we don't my brain is going to explode out of frustration.' I could sense in him that, as the minister responsible, he had to act upon instructions, but that he might have held a slightly different position and was unable to get the dollars required to do it. I understand how those things work, too.

Since that time, the RDA network (as it has become since the RDAs were created from the RDBs when the member for Colton was minister, actually), the area consultative committees (as the federal government arm of it was called), and the regional development boards and their support from local government have merged into the one organisation, and I think it has done some great work. There was a reduction in number from 13 to seven. There is a metropolitan-based RDA also, which is entirely funded by the federal government and the state does not contribute towards that.

The RDA is that really critical organisation out in regional South Australia which has the absolutely vital job of, to put it simply, connecting the dots and ensuring that visions and opportunities actually become a reality as far as humanly possible. Sometimes they do not succeed, but often they do. I think there is a commitment and dedication of those who put the proposals forward, who invest their own dollars and put in significant capital to grow their business, or to look for augmentation opportunities for infrastructure required to grow their business, or many simple things the RDA network does to give the skillset required to our workers out in regional areas.

A wide variety of roles are undertaken by really not a lot of people who commit an enormous number of hours and who have worked exceptionally hard in the period they have been employed by the RDAs to create the networks of people required to ensure they know who to speak to. Whether it be within government operations, within local community operations or within local government operations, they steer people who have ideas for opportunities through the minefield in order to get a positive outcome.

I know that the member for Frome (the Minister for Regional Development) and I think very similarly in this regard—I believe we do. Indeed, the minister and I have had discussions about the fact that, in the allocation of any state dollars to anything, there need to be some really strong KPIs attached. There need to be some exceptionally strong outcomes from that, which are measurable and which can ensure that, where dollars are provided, there is an assurance given and a reporting against that and that it is not just a matter of continuing on and, if it does not work, too bad, and all that sort of stuff, but that everybody focuses on what the outcomes need to be, that there is a report against the plan that is put forward for the dollars to be provided in the first case, and then we get some strong outcomes.

Pre 30 June 2013, the Hon. Gail Gago, as the previous minister for regional development, did create a bit of a structural change, and I recognise that. What used to be a $3 million Regional Development Fund was broken up into two streams. Stream 1 was $1.4 million, which was allocated on the basis of $200,000 for each of the RDAs, to provide them with a set of dollars, but still not necessarily core funding entirely but that level of capacity to fund part of their operations, to progress applications and to be involved in things.

The key thing, though, is the difference factor. Before, it used to be $4.083 million, which had had very little inflationary growth since the RDBs and RDAs had been created. I think when the Hon. Karlene Maywald was minister there might have been 2.5 per cent or something like that (I have that figure in my head) for them to have that opportunity.

As part of the political process and the election commitment, the Liberal Party quite proudly announced a $3 million fund of core funding to go to the RDA network to ensure that continuity of staff members was able to exist. Yes, there was going to have to be some consolidation of what they might do: there might have been some operations to move some of their aspects together. It was less than the $4.083 million previously provided, but it allowed those dollars to be there to give them some really strong financial future and some surety for employees so they did not lose good people. Minister Gago at the time committed $1.4 million. It reduced what was available for regional development funding, predominantly for infrastructure, down to $1.6 million.

I am aware, as we all are in this place, that since the election and minister Brock's elevation to that cabinet position there has been some change, absolutely. With the $15 million, which is the new figure of the old $1.6 million, there are five separate components. Expressions of interest have been sought for two of those component funding areas, and that is over certainly the 2014-15 financial year, but the minister is also confirming for me for the forward estimate period, for the four years of the electoral term.

I know—and I am sure the minister has spoken to these people because I have had feedback from RDA networks, some who ring a little bit more often than others—that it is that core funding area where there is no contestability attached to it that is a key for them. When the minister first announced the $1.4 million was being increased to $3 million, the key word I picked up in the press announcement was 'contestable' funding. Yes, I can support in principle the fact that it is not just a matter of giving money and that it has to be measured, but where indeed there are contestable dollars in essence it means 'based on priority of applications proposed by the different RDAs and depending on if it gets support', and that alarmed me.

I appreciate the fact that the minister made available Mr Don Frater, who is the deputy CE of PIRSA, to come and brief me on this and the five components of the $15 million, and I am aware that in recent weeks there has been some movement forward and some improvements on that. But even as of yesterday, an RDA contacted my office and is continuing to talk to us.

The minister wants to get some strong outcomes, absolutely, but from an RDA perspective, it is vitally important for them as they approach 30 June to ensure that they have continuity of staff. It is those people who I think are potentially impacted by it directly, but it is the wider community that is impacted by it in the longer version of it if they are lost because they have the skillset to ensure that some good outcomes nearly immediately when proposals are put to them or when training is required or on how best to use dollars because they have a level of experience in it.

It is an absolute desire of mine to ensure that a sufficient level of core funding is provided to the RDA networks to give them that surety and that the minister wants to ensure that the RDA network survives and works strongly—and rightly so because he wants to preside over an important policy area where there are some good challenges out there, and we have seen figures come out today that concern me significantly about employment issues.

That is why the purpose of the motion is to enforce not really in a political way—even though we use the political world to provide the opportunity for the argument—but from the Liberal perspective we want great outcomes, too. We want to ensure that the dollars are there and that the people on the ground actually benefit. When I say 'people on the ground', it is the people who live in regional communities, no matter how large those communities are.

The member for Frome lives in a reasonable-size town—I believe it is 14,000 or 15,000 people. I live in a community of 1,000 people, and there is a lot less than 1,000—

Mr van Holst Pellekaan: It's a big place!

Mr GRIFFITHS: Well, yes. The member for Stuart says it is a big place; he lives in Wilmington, which is probably—

Mr van Holst Pellekaan: Around 200.

Mr GRIFFITHS: Two hundred. They are all great places and they all deserve a strong future, but they need some level of support to ensure that that occurs. It requires an individual to have a vision, to have a commitment to what they want to do, but it requires a level of support to exist for them and also the communities in which they live and operate, to actually go through those sometimes insurmountable challenges that are presented to them, where, in reality, there is a solution at hand. But, the solution at hand needs a level of experience to actually cultivate it.

In moving this motion, it is just to enforce the fact that it requires dollars, and it requires a very conclusive announcement quite soon which, while improvement has been made in the last week, actually allows the network to operate. They all bring a variety of skills and they all have a great passion and commitment to it. I know of some RDAs where they have had to create some significant structural changes in how they have done things to try and reduce their costs.

The thing that I absolutely believe in is the commitment to what they do. I know the amount of hours they spend in their cars driving to appointments, the times of the day that they are on the telephone, and the weekend commitments that they have, to be involved in community growth activities, really demonstrate to me that this is an area of support that the state government has previously committed to and currently does, but there are some questions being asked that are absolutely vital.

I just want to finish up by saying that, due to fact that there was some unsurety that existed, there was a bit of a debate federally about what to do financially. I know the minister certainly made the statement that I think there were two states where there was a voice, apparently, that there was unsurety about state government funding, and therefore what that would do with the feds. It was so pleasing to me when, on 19 May, as part of the federal budget announcement, it was announced that there would be $80.9 million provided across the RDA network in the future to actually support the network. I think there are something like 60 or so—the minister might correct me on the number of RDOs—

Mr Treloar: Fifty-five.

Mr GRIFFITHS: Fifty-five—that exist across the whole nation. But, no matter where you are in regional Australia, the same desperate need exits. From a federal perspective, it is absolutely key that they do it. I know, in contact that I and the Leader of the Opposition had via approaches made to the Hon. Jamie Briggs and the Hon. Warren Truss, for us it was a key that the feds continued to support it financially, and I am so pleased that they did that; it is an important one.

The basis of the motion is to enforce that from a state perspective. Yes, the funding has been brought up to $3 million. There are still some questions asked about the core principal of that, and if there is a level of contestability or a level of national allocation. I know in the older days when it was a little bit over $4 million, the average worked out to be $585,000 per RDA; it has come back a bit. Yes, they have trimmed their operations; yes, I think in the ones that I have certainly spoken to, they have used every bit of accumulated funding that they might have had to ensure they have had a continuance since 1 July 2013 to this year on the basis that no matter what occurred at the time of the election there would be commitments that would come through.

I think it is fair to say that from a regional South Australian perspective, there was great disappointment with the original commitment by the Labor Party. The Hon. Gail Gago, as the previous minister, was not prepared to increase that; it is only the uniqueness of the parliament as it sits now that has created the opportunity for minister Brock to get some additional dollars allocated to that.

But, from the Liberal Party perspective, yes, we want that, yes, we want to ensure those $3 million are available to be used, and not in a contestable way, and yes, the strong outcomes and principles that I believe the RDA has achieved over its lifetime—and indeed that of its predecessor from the RDB—are supported, and that we continue to have a very strong network of seven RDAs out there where great people are given that opportunity to make visions become reality.

That is what the parliament is challenged to do. Yes, we announce policies, and yes, we commit dollars in various ways, but you have got to give people a heart, and I think this is a great way of actually demonstrating it. Thank you, minister.

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (12:04): I rise today in support of this motion, and expect that most members of this place should also rise, because they owe a lot to the regions. Indeed, they owe a lot to the role that the RDA plays in our state's regions. RDAs are a vital resource to regional communities across this state. The RDA in my electorate of Schubert (the Barossa RDA, which takes in areas not only the Barossa but further out towards Mallala, Gawler and other areas within Light) does important and irreplaceable work for the community and its people, and the organisations in the community. It facilitates connections, with the goal of driving economic development and jobs growth. By their own description, they collaborate with industry, community and government. Offering assistance for business investment, advocacy and business case development for regional infrastructure, career development and skills training access.

It is not the role of the RDA Barossa to deliver each and every priority articulated there; rather, it is the role of the RDA to test possibilities, advocate strategically, build partnerships and articulate the rationale and benefits of these priorities to encourage and support relevant collaborations to implement them.

The regions bring more than their fair share to the table. They contribute more with less over and over again. The core funding that we are discussing today would be gratefully received, but delivering money on a contestable basis and not core operations is disingenuous and I think weakens our RDAs.

RDAs, when left to their own devices, will facilitate jobs growth. RDAs, with sufficient ongoing funding, can garner infrastructure, which begets industrial development. Industrial development begets jobs, a stronger local economy and, especially important to my electorate, greater visitation and tourism growth. Let the RDAs build the programs and projects that they and their communities deem most appropriate. Big government interference in this way is not useful; in fact, it is a detriment to job creation. It is a cruel counterintuitive initiative that holds back jobs.

In their rush to be seen as a job-creating government, this government, which we know empirically does not care for the state's regions, is, in fact, stymying job growth in regional areas. It is not enough to be seen to be creating jobs, you must be actually creating jobs on the ground, where they are most needed. In the last 12 months, unemployment in the Barossa-Mid-North-Yorke region has almost doubled. There is an immediate need to stop this decline. In the last 12 months, the unemployment rate has risen from 5.2 per cent to 9.5 per cent—that is in just 12 months. It is close to being double the national average, which sits at 5.8 per cent. For the youth of our area, that figure is much steeper.

In April, the Minister for Regional Development was happy to announce this $3 million in funding for the state's RDAs, but this is not new money; it is simply reinstating money that was previously cut by the Weatherill Labor government.

Since the previous cuts to their operational budget, RDAs across the state have been struggling to retain staff and the programs they run. Councils have been lobbying for funding to continue and to be increased, and I fear their calls have fallen on deaf ears. I await the result of today's budget with bated breath, but knowing this government's poor record on looking out for the regions, which contribute so much to the state's bottom line, I do not have much hope. In fact, I have a fear, a fear that the communities that contribute so much to the bottom line of this state's finances and rarely see an acknowledgement, let alone support, from this government will be forgotten.

My fear is that today's budget will completely ignore the communities that do so much and rarely are given kudos. They lag behind in support, infrastructure and jobs, and they do not deserve to be held back anymore. This Labor minority government lags far behind what the regional areas of this state could have experienced under a Liberal government, $100 million further behind to be exact. That is the difference in price tag between what the Liberal government offered ($139 million) when we went to the March election and the deal struck with minister Brock after the election, which only came to a paltry $39 million. I say to the member for Frome that he needs to go back and ask for more money, and we are certainly here to give him support in doing that.

Yesterday, we heard in this place that the Weatherill government is going to have an increased focus on South-East Asia. It was announced by the minister yesterday, in a ministerial statement, that the government is pinning its hopes on the state's renaissance coming from South-East Asia—and, can I say, in this endeavour, the regions are required to be at the table.

Indeed, when the minister opposite, in his statement, listed the exports that come out of South Australia into South-East Asia, every single one of them was an export that came from regional South Australia—every single one of them, from agricultural exports to mining exports to wine exports, which would very much come out of my electorate. They need to look at the regions, and here is a way, through this motion and this motion being taken up as government policy, that we can support our regions further. If we look after them, they will pay us in spades. The regions and the RDAs have always had to do more with less, but with more, they can do so much more. We should not leave them wanting.

In my maiden speech I talked about an alternative service delivery model for services into our regions. I talked about collaborative community organisations that can help to provide a more efficient, more in-tune way of delivering services to our regions and the RDA is a prime example of that. In fact, to my mind, it is the most prime example. My RDA is linked to all sectors of the community. They are a collaborative body. I have sat in on a number of meetings with people from the food industry, the tourism industry, the SA Wine Industry Council, and other organisations, all sitting around together, all working in a collaborative fashion with the RDA at the heart of the table and at the heart of the discussion.

The RDA is fantastic in my region at being able to pull groups together. To get an idea to work and to get buy in from across the community, the RDA has been front and centre at pulling people together to get everybody on the same page. I think the most important role that the RDA currently plays—especially when so much is being pulled back from our regions—is its ability to continue to retain institutional knowledge. Governments, by their nature, create churn in programs, and so often I have seen regional programs come and go where good work was built up and lost, especially in the tourism sector of late where everything collapses when funding is pulled. The RDA is the one body that has been able to stand the test of time and be the one that can be there so that, when the next program comes along and picks up and starts again, they have some institutional knowledge that helps us not to start back at square one.

I give an example within PIRSA of a food industry officer who I would say came to visit me about two years ago. The conversation I had with her was perhaps not the most pleasant in her life, but I gave her a history of the position that she currently fills. I said to her, 'You are the fifth person with the fifth different job title doing the same job that I have seen over my last 10 years.' Now I am only 31 years old, but I should not have been around long enough to see the same position occur under the fifth different guise. I gave her the history of where her position was at. It was very clear from our discussion that she was motivated and energetic, but she did not know of what she spoke. The difficulty was that she was starting from scratch with no knowledge base and no support. This was merely, in my view, spending taxpayer money that could otherwise be redirected into organisations that have proven themselves over a long time, and the RDAs are very much part of that.

Prior to getting elected one of the first groups that I engaged—and one that I continue to engage—was the RDA. In fact, I am going to talk about a number of their priorities that they have listed in their road map, in their 10 game changers for the broader Barossa and RDA Barossa region. Can I say that these priorities mirror very closely what I hear in the community. In fact, when I went through this document with the CEO of RDA Barossa, I was struck by how closely aligned and how in tune RDA was with the broader community.

The first project—and there is no particular order, I am only picking out the ones that are attributed more so to my electorate—is the World Heritage listing for the Mount Lofty Ranges Agrarian Landscape. This is a project that would bring international focus and recognition to our area. It would not increase regulation for planning processes to stop agricultural industries, but is a great way to get recognition for some of the pristine unique environments that we have in the broader Schubert electorate.

The second issue on the RDA road map game-changer project is something that the member for Light should take heart in, and that is the rejuvenation of the Gawler Main Street as a community centre. As somebody who has to traverse the Gawler Main Street on too often an occasion, can I say that the work here is very much needed. High speed broadband is another priority which is holding back regional economic growth from becoming more modern. Modern farming needs internet and it needs solid broadband. The amount of people who have come to my electorate office wanting to discuss poor broadband services—and sometimes it is merely less than a kilometre from a regional town centre—shows that our regional communities are held back by this not being addressed.

Last on the list, and can I say for my mind most prominently on the list, is the backing for a regional hospital for the Barossa. The RDA is on board with the project, realising that it is integral to building a more modern community and building a prosperous community in the Barossa, and I commend them for that. I commend this motion to the house and thank the member for Goyder for bringing it to our attention.

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (12:14): I rise to support the motion. They are very tough shoes to fill, and I commend the member for Schubert for an outstanding speech. I have an interest to declare and I will do that straight up. My wife is a member of the RDA of the Limestone Coast, so I come with a fair bit of knowledge about how RDAs work as well as the value of RDAs to the region.

On that note, I commend the member for Frome for at least bringing regional interests onto the table for the government to consider, but I fear that over its past 12 years the government has really shown its true colours. People might be amazed to know that the Premier has not visited the Limestone Coast in an official capacity since, in my recollection, December 2011. Here we are in 2014, and December 2011 was the last time the Premier visited our region. If I need to be corrected I will be, but that is my recollection.

Looking at RDAs and the national charter, I was staggered to pull out two very important, key points. In the national charter it talks about a partnership between federal, state and local government. It also talks about developing and strengthening the regional communities of Australia. That is the type of thing that we need for regional South Australia and we have the mechanism, with RDAs, at our disposal.

Instead of embracing that and funding them properly—and when I say funding them properly I am talking about continual funding, not contestable funding—the government, in its wisdom, runs off and creates different organisations like partnership brokers and cluster initiatives, which are all able to be facilitated through RDAs. So RDAs play a very important role in regional communities and, in terms of developing and strengthening regional communities, if they are funded correctly they will be able to achieve their task.

I can give a couple of examples. One business in our region—a major employer of about 200 people—was looking to leave our region. You have to realise, Madam Deputy Speaker, as I am sure you do, that we are very close to the Victorian border in the seat of Mount Gambier, so there is this continual incentive from the Victorian government to attract many of our businesses 25 kilometres over an imaginary line, which sets up different conditions under which they would operate.

Those conditions are normally cheaper power, lower WorkCover rates; basically, the cost of doing business. If it were not for our RDA at a local level, working with that business to overcome some of its barriers with HR, in particular, and associated costs, we would have lost that business to our Victorian counterparts, who put on the table a whole range of incentives and attractions to garner that employment opportunity for residents of Victoria.

If it were not for the RDA many of the strategic planning operations would not be occurring at a local level which, when funding is available, gives rise to the option for our region to apply for that funding and, hopefully, be successful in that funding to stimulate our economy and develop and strengthen our community. With that, I commend the motion.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (12:19): I rise to wholeheartedly support the member for Goyder in this motion. His motion is very, very genuine and I know it comes from the bottom of his heart. There are a few of us here on this side who have, at different times, had the shadow ministry for regional development, and every one of us—and others on our side who live and work in regional areas—live and deal with this issue all the time, so I believe the member for Goyder without any hesitation when he says that this is not about politics, this is not about wedging anybody, this is not about trying to create an issue that does not exist. This is actually about continuing to press the same very genuine issues home to the government.

These are vitally important issues and I am an incredibly strong advocate of the three-tiered system where local government, state government and federal government all jointly contribute to regional development in each part of the state. I think that is just common sense. You cannot separate those and say, 'Well, it's only local and federal,' or 'It's only local and state,' or whatever anybody else might like to say. All three levels really must contribute because you are dealing with the real nitty-gritty of small business development (and trying to help somebody get a small business off the ground with the details that go along with that), all the way through to significant major infrastructure development that just cannot proceed without federal government support, so it only makes sense that that happens.

I was very happy to publicly support and thank the state government when it, with the federal government—state Labor and federal Labor—jointly set up that three-tiered funding about six years ago. I was not in parliament then, but it gave me no concern whatsoever, although I was a Liberal candidate, to say that Labor had done a good job. After becoming a member of parliament, I did not hesitate to say that Labor had set up a good system to make that happen. But, unfortunately, I also had to say very clearly and very strongly how disgraceful I thought it was that, less than a year after establishing that system, the state Labor government, which helped create it, withdrew from that system.

I thought that was a terrible thing to do for many reasons—because there was a good system in place, to start with, so it just does not make sense to pull it apart but also because so many of the people who work in regional development (what were regional development boards and became Regional Development Australia organisations) had worked so hard to reorganise themselves to fit into this new world. Any corporate or organisational restructure is difficult for the people who are involved in it, even when they know they are heading the right way, but there is uncertainty in jobs. Not everybody stays; new people come in. Geographic boundaries are adjusted and where you might have dealt with a state organisation, you start dealing with a federal organisation or vice versa.

People went through all of that believing they were going to come out the other side with a better structure, and they did. They did come out the other side with a better structure that had funding contributions from all three levels of government. They had structured term financial contributions from all three levels of government and they had representation on their governing boards from all three levels of government. Less than a year after that was established, the state government said, 'Oh well, we're going to pull out,' and it was disgraceful.

It really was a dreadful kick in the guts for the people who work in regional development across our state, but they stuck with it. Good people have done a fantastic job, doing everything they possibly could to continue doing that good work. Then, the state government said, 'We're going to fix it. We're going to fix it all. We're going to replace the funding.' I will not go through in all the detail the contributions I have made on exactly this topic before but, suffice to say, they did not replace all the funding and the funding that was replaced was given under competitive grants, not core funding.

Deputy Speaker, you know that I believe in competition. You know that I think healthy competition where you have a level playing field and not a monopoly is great. I really do believe the cream rises to the surface when people have equal opportunity, but this is a different kettle of fish. You cannot have six-months by six-months, or one-year by one-year, or even two-year by two-year government funding for people to do work in regions, because you cannot then attract good people to stay and do the work in regions. Certainly, the competition will make sure that the regional areas or the RDA that has the best projects to put forward will get the funding, and that is positive; I support that, but you have to have a component of core funding so that you can attract and keep good people working in regional areas.

You will not get one of the best people working in regional South Australia, wherever it happens to be, to stay doing what they do if another organisation that can give that person permanent employment or potentially a five-year contract on likely more money says, 'How would you like this?' They will say, 'Well, I don't really want to leave what I'm doing, but yes, I've got a family, I've got a mortgage, I've got kids, I've got the normal pressures that families have.'

You cannot keep the best people doing this work and you cannot attract the best people by saying, 'We'd love you to come and work. We've got some great projects, fantastic regions, we think we make a significant contribution to the state's economy and we'd like to give you a 12-month contract because that's the only funding that we get from the government.' It is not practical and it is unfair on the people who work in regional South Australia and it is unfair on the regions and it diminishes the productivity of the regions.

The government said, 'We're going to replace the funding', but actually did not. They were still $4.1 million per year short in total on what they had taken away and the component that they did replace was competitive funding, not core funding, so there is not money to pay rent, to pay electricity, to keep people on longer term contracts so that there is some security in the work, because we all know the vast majority of work that is done in regional development takes several years to show benefits. You cannot get benefits from work that takes several years to do when you can only offer people one and two-year contracts and so, I think that was disgraceful.

I think, without trying to put words in his mouth, that is largely what is behind the member for Goyder's very positive motion: to try to encourage this government to understand that they have to do more; to try to encourage the government to know that if they want to continue to get the benefits that regional South Australia contributes to our entire state, they have to give regional South Australia some security; that the support the state government gives them will be there for the long run as well, and certainly that is not here at the moment.

Let me say very clearly that this is not about the member for Frome. This is not about the situation that he is in. If he was on our side, or if he was on the government's side, or if he was an Independent as he was for the last four years, as everybody else who is here was here for the last four years, he would have heard me talk about exactly these same things. It is not about him. He has the opportunity now to contribute more than he ever did before to this debate. I urge him to do that. I know he wants the best for his region. I know he wants the best for regional South Australia. He now has a better position than he has ever had before to make a difference here, but we do not bring this forward because he is in that position; we have been saying the same thing for years. We have known it is true and we will continue to fight for regional South Australia.

This is not regions asking for money. This is not regions just putting their hand out and saying, 'Please support us, give us money so we can create jobs', this is an investment. This is an investment of taxpayer money in regional South Australia; regional South Australia which contributes 54 per cent of our state's exports. It is only sales to other states and other nations that bring real money into our state, and 54 per cent of overseas exports comes from regional South Australia. What better place to invest taxpayer money so that people can continue to do that work.

There are four RDAs that share geography with Stuart: the Far North, Yorke and Mid-North, the SA Murray-Darling Basin, and the Barossa. They are the ones that, as the member for Stuart, are first and foremost in my mind, but I know that the other three that work across the state do exceptionally good work as well, and I urge this government to do everything they can to support them in that work.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:29): I too rise to support this motion by the member for Goyder. I think on this side of the house we have had first-class contributions in support of the RDA organisations and, of course, as everyone has said, we do have seven RDAs in the state.

In my electorate of Chaffey, the Murraylands & Riverland is the branch of the RDA that I am most focused on, although the RDAs right across the state do great work. I would like to congratulate them, their boards and their staff for the work they have done. I hope that, after today's budget announcement, the Minister for Regional Development has been successful in attaining core funding for the continuation of the RDAs.

Sadly, for quite some time now, the RDAs have been almost hamstrung by their capacity to get on with the job and do what they are designed to do; that is, they are there for the benefit of their regions and to lay foundations for business development and business initiatives. For too long, they have looked over their shoulder as to whether they are going to have a job tomorrow or the week after, or as to exactly what the future holds for them. As the member for Stuart has just said, it is unfair for anyone who is going to put their heart and soul into a job not to know whether they have a job the following week or not knowing if they can put food on the table in a month's time because their future is so unclear.

On 15 April, the member for Frome announced an agreement with the Premier to deliver annual funding of $3 million. Delivery of that funding is still unclear and, while the additional $1.6 million is welcomed, there are concerns that funding on a contestable basis threatens the viability of the RDA network.

The member for Frome continues to ignore calls from the RDA, Rob Kerin, the LGA and regional councils to reinstate core funding of the $3 million a year that is not project-based. I say that because I feel that we will get an announcement today, and I hope, for this state, that the minister is successful. In saying that he is ignoring these calls, what I mean is that the minister continues to say, 'Wait and see. We will see after the budget.' So, again, today will be a telling day.

I would just like to touch on my space, which is the RDA Murraylands & Riverland. My local RDA, which is, as I have said, one of the seven, is critically important to investment and growth in local business, particularly with the readjustment of the electorate and particularly around irrigation with the current drought that has seen the absolute trashing of many of the businesses. It has seen a financial draining of many of the small businesses and the family businesses that have been affected financially, socially and mentally over the last eight years with the drought and the rebuilding after the drought.

This is where the RDAs have been critically important in reassuring businesses and helping restructure, but also helping businesses to be able to adjust to the way that they had been dealt with, their financial drain, their financial loss, market loss and particularly their capacity to survive on the economies of scale that they once did. Without the core funding, there is no certainty on leases of offices and vehicles and the staff, as I have said, have no certain future.

Again, it is about that continuity and that familiarisation so that those staff members understand that region they are working in. It is about them having the contacts, it is about them having the go-to people so that they can actually perform their duties. At the moment, many of them are filling out funding applications. They are spending more energy on survival than on being the compliant RDA conduits that they have to be within their region.

What I would also like to say is that, as I understand it, my RDAs staff are living on a week-by-week basis. They do not know whether they will still be in existence next week; they do not know whether they will be in existence the week after. How can that be good for business? How can that be good for the viability of the region they represent?

Projects are still planned but there are very few resources to carry out that planning, there are very few resources to carry out the longevity of many of these projects that, in some instances, are one step or two steps through, partway through. Again, it is about the certainty that not only the RDA needs but it is the certainty that the regions they represent need.

We cannot underestimate the importance of what the RDAs do. While there is a lot of work that is commercial-in-confidence, the RDAs are building core networks with local businesses so that funding can be leveraged from that network. The RDAs are helping to change the culture of business to grow and diversify, particularly in the Murraylands and Riverland. As I have said, they are presenting collaboration and clustering to businesses at the moment.

One of the initiatives that the RDA was involved in during my first term was the BHP Roxby Downs project. It was a great disappointment to South Australia that the BHP Roxby Downs project did not go through but, prior to that announcement, I invited BHP to the Riverland to give us an overview of how their tendering process works, how the contract legitimacy would work and the tier process for businesses to put a tender forward to be a part of what was going to be one of the state's biggest stimulus packages in history. Sadly, after that, BHP's decision was not to go ahead with it. The RDAs brought those businesses together and demonstrated how those businesses could diversify away from being a tier 1 or a tier 2 business looking for tenders and how they could work together in a collaborative process and tender for tier 3, even up to tier 5 and 6, so that they could go for bigger projects, and they could work together. I think that was one of the great initiatives and great benchmarks that the RDA, particularly in the Riverland and Mallee, achieved. They have formed a group called The Grid and that business cluster is now tendering for bigger projects, they are working together collaboratively, and I think it is a great example of what can be achieved.

As the member for Schubert has said, in today's business world to grow and diversify we need the digital age and we need to have businesses that are up-to-date with information. We need to have feedback to farmers on their tractors. We do not have to go back to the office these days. For a primary producer, farmer or horticulturist to have his finger on the pulse, know what his markets are doing and know where he needs to be on any particular day of the week, he needs to have that digital connection. That is something that is sadly lacking in regional South Australia. It is another initiative that the RDAs are looking at and I think it is a great one.

In some of the other projects, for example, they are looking at taking almond hulls and extracting sugars from them to make that another industry in the Riverland. I think that is a great initiative. A researcher has been engaged and is looking into how to utilise the product which is being discarded at the moment for feed. Investment and trade underpin South Australia's economy. It is a broad portfolio for which I am very happy to be the shadow minister. The RDA's role is vital as a conduit to provide guidance from paddock to ship to plane into those trade markets to guide producers on value-adding, guiding business on a pathway to gaining knowledge and contacts, and giving them guidance on their tenders. Madam Deputy Speaker, did you know that the food sector is the largest employer in manufacturing? South Australia's exports are vital to this state's economy, as are the RDAs.

Time expired.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (12:39): I rise today to support the motion from the member for Goyder, a very well-intentioned and well-supported motion. For the sake of the Hansard I will read the motion:

That this house strongly urges the regional development minister, in conjunction with the state government to—

(a) provide adequate core funding for the ongoing operations of the seven Regional Development Australia (RDA) committees in South Australia;

(b) ensure that the operational funding of the RDA network is provided annually on an uncontested basis; and

(c) ensure that the federal government commitment of $80.9 million in operational funding to the RDA network across the nation is recognised.

We have heard many contributions from this side about the critical nature of this core funding and that it remain core funding rather than contestable funding simply because the RDAs are so critically important throughout the regions of South Australia. There are seven across South Australia, and there are 55 similar organisations right across South Australia.

It will be for this government an investment into the future development and sustainability of the regions. I have been a great advocate of regional development boards in the past, and I have had a good working relationship with the Eyre Peninsula and Whyalla Regional Development Australia board. Unlike the member for Stuart, the electorate of Flinders falls entirely within the boundaries of one Regional Development Australia board. In fact, it is an amalgamation of two previously existing boards: the Eyre Peninsula board and the Whyalla board came together in 2009, I think, to form the one agency.

It has become critical, I believe, in strengthening partnerships between the three levels of government, and we have heard discussion about that today. Like it or not, we have three tiers of government in Australia: federal, state and local. All are important, all are critical, and the links between the three are critical. One of the things the RDA does particularly well is provide links between those three tiers. It also provides critical links between government and business.

Ultimately, the role of the RDA is to foster and assist business in their ventures and in their sustainability. There is often disparity between where businesses are and where government is—that is not the fault of either, it is just the way it is. Over past years, the RDAs have provided a vital link between those, and it needs to be ongoing.

We have heard today in the contributions about the significant importance of the regions to the South Australian economy—over 50 per cent of the state's export income comes from the regions. In fact, with the indulgence of the house, I will talk a little about the importance of the Eyre Peninsula and the Regional Development Australia board in Whyalla and Eyre Peninsula and its contribution to the state's economy.

We do things like manufacturing, agriculture, mining, fishing and aquaculture, tourism, commerce and retail, building and construction, and in all these major industries the RDA in Whyalla and Port Lincoln have played a critical role. We have 11 council areas across Eyre Peninsula, plus small outback areas, mainly west of Ceduna, and one of the slogans our regional development board works towards is, 'Developing an Eyre of prosperity', and 'Eyre' in this case is spelled as in Eyre Peninsula. Its mission statement is:

To develop a globally competitive economy for the communities in the region through fostering environmentally sustainable business and industry development, export initiatives and positive support for development.

That is quite a mouthful and it sums up a lot of the ambition and intentions of the Eyre Peninsula board, and I have no doubt that the boards right across the state have similar mission statements. I would like to talk a little bit about the staff I have known who have worked within the regional development boards, and to a person they are extraordinarily dedicated, they are extraordinarily capable, and I have found that they have immersed themselves in the communities in which they work.

This makes them part of the community, and it gives them a good understanding of the communities they work in and of the challenges and the opportunities that exist. They are extraordinarily hardworking, as I said. Also, the board members are community members who give their time for the future development and prosperity of their own local communities. They deserve some certainty, and that certainty—the certainty of employment, the certainty of their projects—will only come if core funding is available.

The regional development boards provide a vast range of services to the community and business sector. On Eyre Peninsula, there are three set units within the board; one deals with economic development, and another deals with business services. Amongst other things, they provide free and confidential advice to start-up businesses or businesses with ideas for development, and they also, very importantly, have an employment and skills unit, and a big part of their work is making available the opportunity for younger people mostly, but also the broader population, to upgrade their skills and increase and improve their employment opportunities.

Obviously, a lot of the focus of the debate and discussion this morning has been on the Minister for Regional Development. Ultimately, his agreement with the government comes to mind with this discussion because he has the opportunity now to really stand up and show his commitment and, to demonstrate the opportunity he has towards, the regions with some core funding. Today is budget day, so we are looking for and expecting an announcement. If the minister and the government today fail to provide adequate core funding and operational funding to the RDA network, ultimately, and unfortunately, his agreement with the Premier to form government on the basis of a renewed focus on regional development will sadly ring hollow.

The minister and government must also ensure that the federal government's commitment of $80.9 million in operational funding to the RDA network across the nation is recognised. This has to be a collaborative partnership between the federal government, the state government and local government, and it is the only way that economic and regional development can deliver projects and strategic outcomes which result in growth.

In closing, I believe that the potential for economic growth in the regions is enormous, but there has to be a focus on the right infrastructure projects to ensure industries can flourish and grow. The RDA committees provide that focus. They provide the strategy and the intellectual property for communities and regional sectors to grow.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK (Frome—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Local Government) (12:48): First, the motion by the member for Goyder has basically already been put in place. I can confirm that, as a direct result of my negotiations with the government, regional communities across South Australia will now receive funding of $3 million per annum through their regional development associations—that is, the RDAs.

I met on 10 June with all the chairs (with the exception of Whyalla mayor, Jim Pollock, who could not attend) of South Australia's seven RDA boards, where I reaffirmed that the $3 million in funding for the seven RDAs will continue next financial year as part of my agreement with the Premier.

The Executive Chair of Regional Development SA (Rob Kerin) was also at that meeting, and afterwards Mr Kerin said that good progress had been made at that meeting and that he was looking forward to working towards a positive outcome from the discussions in the coming months. The meeting we had that particular day was very honest and frank with lots of discussion, and I believe that is the way we should have gone in the first place. Senior staff in my department—that is, PIRSA and Regions SA—also met with the RDA chief executives on the same day to clarify arrangements for accessing the funding.

Without the agreement reached with the government, RDA funding from 1 July would have remained at $1.4 million. In a tight budgetary environment this is a significant investment of taxpayers' money, as much of it needs to be used for growing regional economies, which means creating jobs that can be quantified. The member for Goyder has already indicated that he and I shared the same issues during the last parliament, and we also want to have KPIs and outcomes, not just people sitting in positions without reaching outcomes.

At the meeting it was agreed that each RDA would submit to my department individual project management plans or requests for staff to pursue projects across each RDA. All RDAs have met and agreed to that request. The member for Chaffey indicated that I have not been liaising with Rob Kerin or the LGA. I have had discussions with the LGA and also with Rob Kerin regarding that.

This funding is exclusive to the seven RDAs in regional South Australia. It is made up of the $1.6 million (excluding GST) in new moneys that I negotiated, and it is in addition to the existing $1.4 million (excluding GST) that is currently available. The $3 million is also over and above funding that other state government agencies, local councils, and the federal government provide to the seven RDAs across South Australia. The new $1.6 million will be available from 1 July 2014, and RDAs can access it in the same way that they have accessed the $1.4 million.

I note the past successes of this outcome-based funding arrangement and the funding provided to RDAs to date, with $2.725 million already allocated to RDAs for programs that cover 2013-14-15. I have to acknowledge the member for Chaffey, who talked about the issue of almonds and value adding. I consider that that is the way that this state and industries across all of regional South Australia need to go. I have been across all of the regions and I am finding great optimism out there. There are lots of challenges, but certainly there is great optimism and a lot of initiatives and innovative ways to go.

I also acknowledge and appreciate the continued funding to RDAs provided by local councils as part of the tripartite MOU between the commonwealth and state and local governments to establish RDAs. Sometimes local councils seem to be forgotten in the discussion of funding for the RDAs across all of South Australia. In addition, RDAs will be able to access grant funds from the expanded $15 million Regional Development Fund which has been negotiated with the government.

Importantly, I also asked at that meeting that the RDA chairs and Regions SA work together to establish a new framework for regional collaboration beyond 30 June next year. This will be based on proposals and program-driven initiatives. I want to reinforce that: we all agreed at that particular meeting, including Mr Kerin, that we need to have a working relationship for all the chairs of the RDAs, Region SA, and myself, to work together for new regional collaboration beyond 30 June next year. I think that is what I am trying to get across to all here: we need that time to be able to develop that collaboration and find a new direction.

We agreed that they should aim to have a working document prepared within three months, so that new arrangements can be put in place before 1 July next year. As the member for Goyder and others on his side have indicated, everybody in this chamber, including me, and everybody in regional South Australia should want the best outcomes for regional communities from this funding, which will support the government's efforts to facilitate economic growth, improved infrastructure and job creation opportunities out there. It is what we in this chamber are all here for: looking at job creation opportunities in a positive and collaborative manner moving forward.

Finally, I do recognise the federal government's involvement in the national RDA network, and I am pleased to see, contrary to the Commission of Audit recommendations, that the federal government has maintained its funding commitment to RDAs through the 2014 federal budget.

I stand to be corrected, but I am not too sure how far after the contract the agreement is going on. However, the figure cited by the member for Goyder indicated in his notice of motion that $80.9 million relates to the whole of Australia. The motion gets a bit confusing when people may look at $80.9 million for South Australia, but when people look at things they look at first lines and may not see the rest. I reinforce to this house that it is across the nation for the period of time. As the member for Flinders has indicated, that will cover 55 RDAs across the whole of Australia. I wanted to get that in Hansard.

I also understand that in South Australia the federal government contributes approximately $1.5 million per year to RDAs. They have very clear KPIs and they want some outcomes, as we will want to have here—a collaborative approach between the state government, the federal government, local councils and also the RDAs to ensure we have the best opportunity going forward. However, the 2014-15 federal budget, handed down on 13 May 2014, included a raft of budget measures that will impact on local communities in South Australia.

It is extremely disappointing to see supplementary local road funding for South Australia not reinstated. This decision results in a reduction of around $18 million per annum in funding to maintain road networks across the state, including regional roads. Again, that will put more opportunities and more pressure on local councils across regional South Australia, and we do not want that. As I have indicated before, we want a lot more stuff out there for the regions.

In addition, local governing authorities have been further hit with Local Government Financial Assistance Grant indexation (FAGs), a combination of CPI increases and relative adjustments to state population movements. The CPI increases have been frozen for three years.

Mr GRIFFITHS: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker: I sincerely appreciate the minister standing and addressing the chamber about this key important issue of regional and rural funding, but I think it is fair to ask about the matter of relevance at the moment. He is talking about other issues which, yes, relate to the federal budget but are not on the basis of my motion.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: So, your point of order is relevance: the chair is listening to the minister and I am sure he will confine his remarks to the debate.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK: What I am trying to get across is that there are lots of challenges there. The meeting we are having with the RDA chairs to form a new collaborative approach for the continuation and the best opportunities from RDAs will be based on how we can work better in the future going on after this year.

However, I will close by saying that the funding package I have negotiated for regional South Australia as part of my agreement with the Premier now comes into real focus because of the impact on the challenges and cuts that will come across. I will finish there.

Debate adjourned on motion of Ms Digance.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.

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