HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)
2014-10-16 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Motions

Metropolitan, Rural and Remote Regions Relationship

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:36): I move:

That this house—

(a) recognises the very important interrelationship between metropolitan Adelaide and the rural and remote regions of our state; and

(b) acknowledges that the equitable provision of resources to and the development of both are necessary for our state's economic and social success now and into the future.

My reason for bringing this motion forward in such a non-political way is that I want all members of this house to consider this motion, to think very carefully about it, and hopefully all form the view that they support it wholeheartedly. This is not about a proud country member bashing the city or anything of the sort. It is genuinely recognising that both metropolitan Adelaide and our country and remote parts of the state are very closely interrelated, that they both need each other, that they both should be valued, and that they both should receive an equitable provision of government resources, which are actually taxpayer-funded resources.

We have approximately a quarter of our population living in regional areas and we have approximately a third of our state's wealth generated in regional areas so, by that measure, regions are punching well above their weight with regard to contribution to our state's prosperity. That includes the fact that much of the wealth that is generated in regional South Australia is reported as having been generated in metropolitan South Australia, and a very strong example of that is mining wealth generation.

If you have the opportunity to look at the gross state product statistics, you would be absolutely staggered to learn how much mining wealth is generated in the eastern suburbs of Adelaide. The reason for that, of course, is that is where many of the mining companies' headquarters are based, so they report their profits, employment and a number of their very positive economic statistics within a metropolitan Adelaide context, whereas actually the true wealth is generated in regional South Australia.

Regional South Australia can be very proud of its contribution to our state's wealth. The very important link is that it cannot continue if we do not have strong, thriving, prosperous and sustainable regional communities. As I said, this is not a debate about pitting one against the other. I can assure members that every single person who lives in regional South Australia knows how vitally important Adelaide is as well. They all know how critically important Adelaide is and how vitally important it is that services are provided in Adelaide as well.

There would not be a person living in regional South Australia who does not, even just occasionally, use a metropolitan road, who does not just occasionally shop in metropolitan Adelaide, who does not just occasionally avail themselves of some medical service, or some other service in metropolitan Adelaide, and who would not have other family members who do not do the same. We understand how vitally important Adelaide is, but it is important that government resources are handed out equitably.

As I said, it is critical that we have thriving, sustainable and successful communities in regional South Australia, because if we do not people will not live there, and if people do not live in our regions, the regions cannot continue to provide the economic contribution to our state that our state requires. That is a very important thing for all members to understand.

I thought I might just quickly go through a few of the government portfolios in no particular order. There are good situations and good examples with every single one of them, which really highlight how vitally important both regional and country South Australia are. In terms of health, as I mentioned before, country people come to Adelaide for health care—there is no doubt about it—but, if they do not have health care in their own region, then young families will not stay in small towns and older people will not be able to come to small towns, and you will not attract workers; in fact, tourists will not be able to comfortably travel from Adelaide to regional areas either if they are concerned that, if they have a car crash, get sick, or need some medication for one reason or another, they would not be able to get help in regional South Australia. If they are worried about that they would not travel to regional South Australia, so health care in regions is exceptionally important for regional people and also for city people.

Education in regions is vitally important—absolutely critically important. South Australian and interstate universities are setting up campuses in regional centres, and that is a very welcome step forward. It benefits those universities, those traditionally Adelaide-based universities, but it also benefits regional towns. There is certainly enormous proof coming from Newcastle and Wollongong in New South Wales, for example, which are both traditionally heavy industry towns where those industries have not disappeared but have subsided enormously, that having tertiary education bases in those regional centres has been one of the really critical foundations of commercial and social growth in what were dying regional centres. Universities have contributed enormously. Universities are not there just for regional people: they are there for themselves as well, and that is quite fair and quite right. There are many shining examples of marvellous South Australians, over the last 175 years, who have been educated in rural South Australia and gone on to make significant contributions to our state.

With regard to transport, I have a view that the single most important road upgrade that should take place in our state, with a view to contributing to our state's economy, is the Strzelecki Track, with 500 kilometres of currently very poor dirt road. The people who work on that road do the very best they can with the insufficient resources they have to keep that road in as good a condition as possible, but they just cannot keep up with it due to the volume of trucks. The reason that there is a volume of trucks is primarily because of the Cooper Basin. There is bitumen from Brisbane all the way to the Queensland/New South Wales border, but people coming from Adelaide have to travel the last nearly 500 kilometres on dirt.

I have great support for the desire to upgrade all sorts of other roads—and there are many other very important roads in metropolitan Adelaide that have been discussed here—but the Strzelecki Track instantly, overnight, as soon as it is upgraded, will bring business that is currently being done in the Cooper Basin from Queensland back to South Australia. Instantly, overnight, there will be significant improvement to our state's economy.

Usually you have to make very expensive, very significant infrastructure step outs and then, after that, business slowly establishes itself around those infrastructure step outs. Following that the state's economy can benefit. We have a situation where our state's economy would instantly benefit. That is not to say that metropolitan road and transport infrastructure upgrades are not warranted, because they are warranted; however, I certainly claim that the upgrading of the Strzelecki Track would be the most important one for our state with regard to immediately contributing to our state's economy.

Disabilities is a very important government and opposition portfolio. There should be no differentiation between people with disabilities, whatever they happen to be, in country or city areas. I am sure that every member in this house—and certainly members on this side—know of families who have had to leave regional areas and come to Adelaide because they have children with disabilities but they just cannot get the support and care that they need in the regions.

An example of what is, fortunately, at the lower end of personal impact—it is still very serious, but we are not talking about a quadriplegic or something like that—are children who need speech therapy. There is a dreadful shortage of support in country schools for children who need speech therapy. I do not believe we have a shortage of speech therapists in our state; we have a shortage of funding for speech therapists in regional schools. That has a huge impact on families. I use that example because it is at the lower end. Ideally, you can still end up having a very healthy, productive and constructive life if you need speech therapy and you do not get it, but you cannot lead nearly as constructive or as positive a life, or make the same contribution, if you do not get it. Unfortunately, it can lead on to other issues.

In terms of housing, there are issues with regard to housing all over the state. I am very concerned to see that there is significant impact on regional South Australia with regard to the government's desire to sell off Housing SA properties in regional areas, where they are greatly needed. I think that has largely been done. Former treasurer Foley is very clearly on the record as saying that he wanted to do that, basically to help fix the state's budget, and regional areas are being adversely affected.

With water and the River Murray, I suggest (and this is not supported by anything firm that I know of, but the member for Chaffey may be able to support me) that more of the people who use the River Murray for recreation come from metropolitan Adelaide than from regional areas. So all metropolitan people should be supporting the River Murray as much as they possibly can.

It is similar with regard to the environment and to small business. One thing that regularly confounds me in this place is the government's failure to understand that 95 per cent or more of all regional agricultural businesses are small businesses. It seems to want to differentiate farms from small businesses. We have had debates in this place and we have spoken about small businesses and farming, and the Minister for Small Business has very regularly and unfairly tried to chastise members of the opposition by saying, 'You only ever stick up for farmers. Why don't you think about small businesses?' He has not realised that they are the same thing; they are almost always the same thing. Agricultural businesses in our state, from east to west and north to south, deserve as much support from the Minister for Small Business as does any other small business you would like to think of.

It is similar for fisheries and forests. By definition, all commercial forests are outside metropolitan Adelaide, but they support our state enormously, and they should not be considered as things that can just be sold off when your budget is running a bit tough. As former minister O'Brien said, they should not be used as a way of trying to get out of putting wages on the credit card. I think that was the expression that he used at the time. It is very unfortunate.

In regard to multicultural affairs, we are very proud in regional South Australia. There is not a region in regional South Australia that does not have a strong foundation from migrants who came, made their livelihood and contributed to our state in regional areas. Again, that should never be considered a 'metropolitan only' portfolio. Of course, tourism is vitally important for both metropolitan and regional South Australia, as is employment and training and emergency services. Every single one of these portfolios—and I have not named all of them—is equally as important, if not more on some occasions, in regional South Australia as it is in Adelaide.

We understand that on the government side there is only one Labor member who is from regional South Australia and there is an Independent member from regional South Australia, and those two are in the vast minority when contributing to this government forming decisions. I call very earnestly on the government to consider this motion and to support it and to recognise that both regional South Australia and metropolitan Adelaide are interlocked, intertwined and neither can do without each other. Investments in transport, health, recreation and sport, education, infrastructure—in anything you could think of—in regional South Australia would support our entire state's development.

If we do not have strong regional development, and if we do not have strong regional communities, we will not have people living in regional South Australia. If we do not have people living in regional South Australia, we will not have people in regional South Australia creating the wealth that people in metropolitan Adelaide rely upon. Investment in regional South Australia is a very sound investment for all South Australians.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK (Frome—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Local Government) (11:52): I support what the member for Stuart has said. However, on this side we are moving—

Mr Pederick: Which side is that?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I am on my feet. All members need to sit down. I will not have the house's order disrupted. The minister is entitled to be heard in silence. Interjections are out of order. The minister has the call.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. The government amendment is:

Leave out all words after (b) and replace with:

supports the balanced provision of resources that recognises the interdependence of metropolitan and rural areas of South Australia and takes into account local needs and priorities as a basis for our economic and social success now and—

Mr GARDNER: Point of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just let him finish his sentence and then you can have your point of order.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK: It says:

—into the future.

Am I doing this the wrong way?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, don't worry. What is your point of order, member for Morialta?

Mr GARDNER: The minister appears not to understand standing orders. He is certainly not moving an amendment in the form in which an amendment should be moved, as the Clerk was so happy to advise me yesterday.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can we have a look at the amendment?

An honourable member interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It is a procedural thing, in that you need to say, 'I move the amendment with the house's indulgence.' We will consider the amendment moved. Are we all happy to continue is the question, and the question is obvious, so the minister has the call.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Can we have a copy?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That normally will happen, and it will happen in a second. It happens automatically and it will happen.

Mr Gardner: It doesn't happen automatically, we have to ask for it.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: As I understand it, when an amendment is moved the attendants print the copies and distribute them, so let's get the house's time moving on. The minister can continue.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK: It gives me pleasure to be able to recognise the very important relationship between metropolitan Adelaide and our regions. Strong regions are the building blocks of a strong state and the key to providing a sustainable, prosperous future for all South Australians. Regional South Australia accounts for 29 per cent of the state's population, produces nearly half of our merchandise exports and contributes about $23 billion—that is about 25 per cent of gross state product.

The government recognises that there is a very strong supportive role in building a framework for prosperity that is responsive to the needs identified by local communities. The government has listened to regional communities and will continue to listen to regional communities about their concerns and aspirations. I propose to amend paragraph (b) so that this house supports the balanced provision of resources that recognises the interdependence of metropolitan and rural areas of South Australia and takes into account local needs and priorities as the basis for our state's economic and social success now and into the future.

The government is committed to regional South Australia and is making a significant investment in our regions in 2014-15 and the following three years. We have a $39 million commitment this year comprising a $13.4 million increase to the Regional Development Fund, a $10 million regional jobs accelerator fund in 2014-15, and some $15.5 million of existing resources across government which have been earmarked for the regions. That commitment remains at $29 million per annum for the following three years.

Mr KNOLL: On a point of order: as much as I am enjoying the minister's contribution, the clock seems to be stuck.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Clerk is adjusting things. Thank you for your reminder, though.

The Hon. G.G. BROCK: In addition, the government has established the Regional South Australia Cabinet Committee to ensure regions are considered at the highest level of decision-making. We will be holding three country cabinet meetings outside of Adelaide each year as part of the government's Charter for Stronger Regional Policy. Country cabinets provide opportunities for community members and business people to interact directly with the most senior levels of government.

Similarly, the Senior Management Council comprising chief executives of all government departments is required to meet in the regions three times each year. We have established a new division, Regions SA, within the Department of Primary Industries and Regions to provide a strategic policy focus for regional development across the state and to provide the regions with a strong voice in the government.

Funding available to Regional Development Australia boards has more than doubled to $3 million. The 2014-15 state budget includes $278 million for capital works projects being undertaken in the regions, covering transport, infrastructure, health, correctional services, emergency services and education. There is also $6 million over four years for the Agribusiness Accelerator Program, $35.5 million for the Rural Road Safety Program, and initiatives to ease cost of living pressures in the form of a $9.3 million allocation to the Patient Assistance Transport Scheme and reductions in electricity costs in remote areas. This government is serious about ensuring our regional areas continue to be supported to grow and meet their potential.

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (11:58): I note with interest that the so-called independent member—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! You are not going to reflect on the member, are you?

Mr KNOLL: I am not going to reflect on the member's presence.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, you are not going to reflect on the member, though, are you?

Mr KNOLL: No.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Good; that would be good.

Mr Pederick: Call him a Labor minister, that might be alright.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr KNOLL: I will defer to the member for Stuart on—

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Mr KNOLL: —the amendment that has been moved. It is interesting to note that comments from members opposite have very much, to my mind, questioned the independence thereof, and I find it quite interesting that we have so-called independent members of the government opposite. In moving a motion such as this, I question the so-called independence that exists.

Unlike other states, in South Australia, we do not have large regional cities. Indeed, we do have one of the most urbanised populations in the world here in South Australia. On the other hand, our regions contribute hugely to the prosperity of this state. In fact, they always have. I had the Flagstaff Hill Primary School group in here yesterday and I pointed out to them that the wheat and the grapes that adorn our carpets here very much reflect the beginnings of our state and, interestingly, still very much reflect two major industries in our state.

But, in order for us to continue to have prosperity in South Australia and to make sure that our regions are prosperous places, we need to make it attractive for young people to live there. Indeed, this is a huge endemic problem in the Barossa where one-third of students, once they reach the end of their secondary schooling, leave the Barossa, with most of them not returning to the region once they have grown up. That is a frustrating and difficult loss of talent for our region.

Many of them go on to do bigger, better and brighter things and study abroad and make huge contributions to our state but the difficult thing is it is not sustainable for any region to be losing one-third of its young people. That is something that is very important to understanding the relationship between metropolitan Adelaide and remote and rural regions.

As I stated in my maiden speech to this house, we cannot continue to ignore the hand that feeds us. We are still, in large part, an agricultural state, and it seems in recent times that we have become embarrassed by this and, for the life of me, I cannot understand why. We have gone chasing new industries, and contentious within the regions is going down the path of increasing mining—which, I must admit, is good for this state but, once we have seen the so-called mining boom come and go, to my mind, very much we come back to this industry which has quietly chugged along (that is, agriculture) and those industries that have been ignored by this government over many years have started to look more and more exciting to the government, possibly because they are some of the few prosperous industries left in South Australia. We should not be embarrassed by our agricultural roots and the strength of our agricultural economy. Instead, we should be looking to embrace it and value-add.

In this place, as a state parliament and state government, we need to reduce the dissidence between city and country, because it is a huge issue. More and more, I see a disconnect between city and country, and creating a divide in our community is not a good thing. I see that divide very much when it comes to food production and, formerly as a food manufacturer, I saw firsthand the dissidence and disconnect that exists.

Indeed, many of the questions that I fielded with regard to food production and how our food is grown suggest to me that there is a lack of understanding within metropolitan areas as to where our food comes from, and that leads sometimes to perverse and adverse consumer interests and creates strains on our farming communities that, through a greater level of education and connectivity, could otherwise be avoided.

There are also challenges in not only keeping young people more generally but that challenge is intensified when it comes to keeping them in the farm sector—to attract them and keep them on the farm. At this point, I would like to commend a group in my electorate that I have been working with closely, Barossa Young People in Agriculture, which is a great initiative of my local Barossa RDA. I commend them for the work they have done in identifying this problem and seeking ways to fix it.

Not to put too fine a point on it, if I look at the major exports for goods going outside of South Australia in 2012-13, all of them, almost without exception, are regional exports. In includes wheat, at over $1 billion, and alcoholic beverages (which would certainly include wine from the great electorate of Schubert), at over $1 billion. There is iron ore, copper ore and concentrates, copper, meat (excluding beef) and lead. Well down the list we have passenger motor vehicles and, unfortunately, I do not see a great future for that export. Underneath that is vegetables, oil seeds and oleaginous fruits (soft).

My point is that we rely so heavily on our regions for our export economy. Understanding the interconnectivity between our regions and between metropolitan Adelaide is important in making sure that those industries stay strong. Investment in Adelaide supports our regions and vice versa. A lack of investment in either will hurt the other, and I would like to point out a couple of withdrawals of investment in my area that have hurt that interconnectivity.

The first is the impending closure of the Tanunda court and other outer metropolitan courts that will add further pressure to our metropolitan court system and will actually make it harder for people in regional areas to access the justice system.

Poor health services in the regions puts pressure on nearby hospitals, and in our case hospitals located in metropolitan Adelaide, adding pressure to an already ailing major hospital system. At this point I would say that I have an answer to some of the congestion issues in the northern Adelaide hospital system. A purpose-built, brand-new health facility in the Barossa would certainly help to ease that congestion. On this side of the house maybe we do not always put enough good ideas forward, but that is certainly a purler I believe the government should take up in helping to reduce congestion in our hospital system.

The third is something that we have been dealing with over the last couple of days in this place and that is the Gawler line electrification. The terminal is the long-term punching bag for the state government. The first cab off the rank every time something needs to be cut is the Gawler line electrification, and I do feel for the people of Gawler and the people of the northern suburbs, but certainly I feel for the communities from Schubert who have certainly been waiting for a long time for an improved train service through to Gawler. But what the effect of that does is to discourage people from using public transport and puts more congestion back on to those communities who then use major arterial roads in metropolitan Adelaide.

The second part of this motion, which amended or unamended I struggle to see the difference, talks about acknowledging the equitable provision of resources, and what has frustrated me most in this place is the government inefficiency that exists that prevents people from going about their daily lives. There are two things I would like to point out.

Firstly, there is a woman in my electorate that I have spoken of previously who waited nine weeks for her DCSI clearance to be able to go back to her job. Nine weeks of unpaid leave where she sat at home waiting for the government to allow her to continue to do the job that she had been doing very well beforehand.

The second is a local drain that I managed to have fixed in my local electorate which had been a sore point for two years. For two years my local community had been waiting for action and it took advocacy on my behalf to get the thing fixed which actually in the end was quite simple. It was merely a Coke bottle in a drain. Why it takes two years for a government to pluck a Coke bottle out of drain to stop major flooding, I do not know. The second part of this motion:

…acknowledges that the equitable provision of resources to and the development of both are necessary for our state's economic and social success now and into the future.

I think about the inequity when it comes to our emergency services levy rate increases where in 2014-15 rural South Australians will pay $22.9 million towards the levy; however, emergency services in the area will only receive $9.4 million worth of funding. This means that country people are paying $13.5 million more than they receive in services, and this is certainly an area where equity or balance needs to be looked at.

In the most recent budget we have seen job losses at SARDI which has had its funding cut by $3 million after a $1.4 million cut last year, cuts to Biosecurity SA, and cuts to the NRM management fund that all hurt our regional areas.

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (12:09): I would like to congratulate and thank the member for Stuart for bringing this motion to the house. Incredibly it reeks of common sense and we see so very little of that.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Incredibly for the member for Stuart or just incredibly?

Mr TRELOAR: Isn't common sense a wonderful thing, Deputy Speaker, so, thank you to the member for bringing this motion to the house. The motion reads:

That this house—

(a) recognises the very important interrelationship between metropolitan Adelaide and the rural and remote regions of our state; and—

In the unamended form, it goes on to state:

(b) acknowledges that the equitable provision of resources to and the development of both are necessary for our state's economic and social success now and into the future.

The member for Frome has moved an amendment to that, and we will consider that in due course. It seems to me that it has very much the same intent; it has just changed some words, which the government is wont to do.

It has been stated already that a quarter of the state's population lives in the regional areas, and, of course, that means that three-quarters of the state's population lives in Adelaide, as the capital city. It is very much a city state—that is recognised—and we have to make our financial decisions, our economic decisions, with that knowledge. Having said that a quarter of the state's population live in the rural areas, we understand also that a third of the state's GDP is produced from those regions. If you follow that argument, it means that the country people, the regions, are very productive in their own right.

The member for Stuart did make the observation that some of that income, particularly mining income, is declared from the eastern suburbs of Adelaide, where many of the mining companies have their headquarters. So, there is a little bit of smoke and mirrors that goes on there, but, in essence, the productivity of the regions remains. It has always been the case, since the very early days of settlement in this state, in fact, that Adelaide has always been the centre and the focus of both population and economic activity.

It was in 1840 that the state, for the very first time, became self-sufficient in food production. It was a good harvest in 1840, and it was the first time the colony was able to feed itself. So, it was a significant year. Of course, very soon after that, in the mid to late 1840s, there was the discovery of copper, which took place in a regional area as well and which led not just to increased wealth but also, in many ways, saved the colony from the brink of bankruptcy.

Primary production is the essence of the regions, and most of that is based on agriculture. Our grain harvest is about to get underway. It looks like being at least average. It is not the bumper crop we were hoping for a couple of months ago; unfortunately, the spring weather has been rather dry and there has been patches of frost, which will impact the grain harvest. Wheat is the main crop, as it always has been. There are very important crops, such as barley, canola and hay, of course.

The member for Schubert has been spoken about viticulture. The member for Chaffey will, no doubt, talk about horticulture when he makes a contribution. Often, the Riverland is referred to as the food bowl of the state. He is probably going to get a debate from other regional members but, be that as it may, the Riverland certainly makes a significant contribution. The adoption of technology in that part of the world has led to more efficient water use, as has the adoption of technology right across primary production increased efficiencies and productivity.

In my own electorate of Flinders, we have the seafood industry, which is of vital importance. It brings around $400 million into Eyre Peninsula. Most of that was initially wild catch, but as we see the years go on, aquaculture is becoming more and more important, with oysters, kingfish, mussels. Who knows what developments might occur in the aquaculture sector in years to come. I know that there is a proposition to grow razor fish out on the West Coast, and we will see where that goes; certainly, the waters are admirably suited.

With forestry down in the South-East, we have seen the debacle of the sale of the forward rotation of the forest. That really has been to the detriment of that industry and that region but, be that as it may, the government has seen fit to do that for short-term gain. In fact, it is interesting in that the income from the sale of the forest matched almost exactly the cost of the Adelaide Oval upgrade—almost to the dollar, I would suggest.

Mr Pederick: And they sold it cheap.

Mr TRELOAR: They sold it cheap.

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon: Like the TAB.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Standing order 144 say the business of the house must be maintained and proceeded with in dignity and I do not see that. Everyone can have a turn to speak; you are just not permitted to speak over the top of each other.

Mr TRELOAR: Thank you, Deputy Speaker, and the Government Whip should be well aware of the need for decorum. Tourism is the last one I want to touch on—that sector which of course also brings such interest and wealth and economic activity to the regions of the state. Some of the tourism activity is nearby to Adelaide, and some of it is further afield. We will hopefully see some growth in that area, although once again I do not see the government necessarily being particularly supportive of that.

We have talked about the challenge of declining population in regional areas and this is a long-term trend. It is a trend that has been going on certainly since the 1960s and probably longer than that. In fact I have seen a graph that would indicate that the long-term price of wheat in real terms has been declining since the middle ages, since those halcyon years following the Great Plague where wheat prices peaked and they have been declining in real terms ever since, so this is a challenge.

It is not just price that dictates or brings about a decline in population; it is also the introduction and adoption of technology and I will give you an example. In the district council of Wudinna, the current population is just half of what it was in 1981, so just 35 years ago. I would be very surprised if that was not reflected in many other councils around the state. At the same time, the productivity of that district council area in agricultural terms has increased. We are achieving more with fewer people and it is purely and simply because of the technology that has been developed and is being adopted.

I do not see that long-term trend of declining population necessarily turning around. That will be the challenge. The challenge for governments and the challenge in this state will be to provide essential services such as health, education, schools and hospitals, roads, infrastructure and telecommunications to areas where their productivity is maintained or increasing, but the population is actually declining. It is all around equity.

Of course, the provision of essential services and the provision of infrastructure components such as roads, rail, ports, telecommunications and television is vitally important not just for the social wellbeing of the country areas and the health and wellbeing of country people but also to help them maintain competitiveness in a global economy. I have spoken about this before, but as a wheat grower, the member for Hammond competes head to head with a grower in Canada, a grower in North America, a grower in the Ukraine and with a grower in Argentina, and unless we are able to maintain a competitive edge or, at the very best, not become uncompetitive due to government restraints and government lack of expenditure, then we are really behind the eight-ball.

I do not think a lot of people have quite grasped this yet. It is absolutely imperative that our small businesses are able to maintain their competitiveness. I will give you an example. The government's cabinet is about to visit the West Coast, I understand, in the last week in November. They will discover, and I have warned them to be prepared for this, that there is very little phone service.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Very little?

Mr TRELOAR: Telephone service.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Alright.

Mr TRELOAR: That is one of the very things that we are battling with and grappling with each and every day not just to undertake our social activities but to actually undertake our businesses. Very quickly, and I see I only have a minute left, Deputy Speaker—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thirty seconds.

Mr TRELOAR: You are cutting into my time, Deputy Speaker. I would like to thank the member for Frome for the opportunity to speak with him yesterday about some road funding priorities. I have talked about the Tod Highway in this place. We also spoken about the Balumbah-Kinnaird road, the Mount Wedge to Warramboo road, and the Wirrulla-Kingoonya road, and I can check the spelling of that with Hansard at a later date.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (12:19): I, too, rise to speak on another great motion by the member for Stuart. I note that there has been an amendment put forward, and I am not aware of whether the member for Stuart will acknowledge that amendment.

I think we have had many motions in this house regarding the importance of regional South Australia not only to the state's economy but to the state as a whole. Regional South Australia fits hand-in-hand with metropolitan South Australia and I really think that, in a sense, they are areas that need to reflect on one another and complement one another.

In the course of my time in this place over the last five years, we continue to come back to the importance of regional South Australia to the state's economy. We note the importance of South Australia's main hub, which is Adelaide, and the importance of how Adelaide fits into the landscape of the state.

More important, I think, is how this current government of almost 13 long years has exacerbated the wedge between metropolitan South Australia and regional South Australia. I look over the last 12 years at just exactly where the government's priorities have been because I think, at the end of the day, what it boils down to is priorities. It is about where the government puts their energy, their finances, their funding and their favouritism.

It has become very obvious, particularly over the last four years, where the majority of their funding is going. We look at the major road projects in this state, we look at the major infrastructure projects, we look at the major hospital projects—all of the major spend in this state is being put into Adelaide, and it is not supporting what I would consider one of the major economic platforms in the state; that is, agriculture. I think many people on this side will agree that agriculture is a renewable, sustainable economic base that has continued to come back year in, year out over the last 100 years or more to sustain South Australia's economy.

Let us face it, over the last 10 years, we have seen drought which has affected the state's economy and we have seen the lack of ongoing mining support. Mining has not flourished as the government, in its overspruiking way, has claimed. What is happening is we continue to see, particularly, as I said, over the last four or five years, the government deprioritise the support that our economic bases need. We hear about mining. We obviously have to remember that mining is essentially digging a big hole and taking out what is underneath the scab. They keep taking it out and eventually it runs out, then that mine becomes defunct and we go to another spot.

In the meantime, agriculturalists, farmers, horticulturalists, vignerons and all of the food producers continue to find better ways to use their land. They find better ways to grow and cheaper ways to grow, but we continue to keep on hitting those walls, which are the costs of doing business, the capacity to employ people and the capacity to have some form of government expenditure to support what the state is in need of; that is, a buoyant economy.

Once we have grown a product on a property or on a farm, we need to get it to a processing plant. We need to get it from the processing plant to the market. We need to get it from the market to the retail outlet, then we have got to get it from the retail outlet to the mouths. Again, we look at how that is being done.

We look at any big road infrastructure. We do not see any rail infrastructure in South Australia—none. At the moment, we are looking at the demise of rail in South Australia. Both of the Mallee lines are imminent for closure. There is pressure on the viability of rail lines right around this state. And yet we look at electrification to bring people from the south into the city—

Mr Picton: Hear, hear.

Mr WHETSTONE: —and from the north into the city. But where is the energy put into infrastructure that is looking to sustain an economy? The member for Kaurna says, 'Hear, hear.' It is all very fine to have your passengers picked up and taken to work, but when you need to have competitive food put on your table that has to come down by truck it is going to congest the roads. It does not make our roads any safer—look at the horrific accidents happening at the bottom of the South-Eastern Freeway. It is with arrogance that we continue to disregard how important rail is.

Look around this great country and all the other states. Every other state in Australia is investing in rail except for South Australia because the importance of rail in South Australia is to put up electrification here in metropolitan Adelaide and make that our priority. We look at the priority of putting in a superway, the north-south connector. That will induce more trucks to come into the city and take the connector from south to north and north to south. Again, why are we not looking outside the square? Why are we not looking at a connection from the South-East to the north and then coming into port?

There are already roads in place, but there is a city-centric focus on having a north-south connector. It is not about bringing more trucks to that connector, it is about easing traffic congestion in metropolitan Adelaide. I assure you that when the north-south connector is finished we will be aghast by trucks because by then, sadly, I see the demise of rail. Just in my electorate alone there will be an extra 10,000 truck movements on the road by the discontinuation of those two rail lines.

Again, it is about the government's priority. Sadly, over the short space of time I have been here I continue to see the government's priority is shifting further and further away from supporting the regions, supporting the regional economies that support South Australia as a whole—not only for food, but for jobs, for prosperity, for the ongoing sustainable economy that regional South Australia established.

In taking away a priority we look at cuts to globally integrating the South Australian economy program. It is about our trade mechanism and how we can grow and trade product overseas to bring new money into this state. But we look at cuts to all sorts of agencies: look at PIRSA and SARDI where the budget is 35 per cent of what it was in 2010. How are we ever going to compete in a changing and more competitive world when all these agencies are having the guts ripped out of them with staff put on voluntary separation packages and never replaced? So, how are we going to remain competitive, not only with the rest of the world, but with the rest of this country? South Australia will just continue to languish.

Yesterday, the Minister for Agriculture stood up and beat his chest about how fantastic South Australia is to be phylloxera free and fruit fly free, yet when we look at biosecurity 13 staff have been cut out of the department and funding is being reduced. How much longer can he stand up and beat his chest and claim that South Australia will be free of phylloxera and free of fruit fly when they continually defund and pull staff out of these departments?

If we look at the sanctuary zones, again it is another pill that regional South Australia is going to have to swallow. It is not about the sustainable industry or the fishing sector. We have already been told that we have best practice in fishing, sustainable fishing practices here in South Australia, and yet we have conservation parks going into the ocean to the detriment of commercial-sector fishing. It really does make you wonder. The member for Flinders mentioned the sale of the forest forward rotations. Again, that is another priority that the government does not see as important.

Time expired.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (12:29): I rise to support the motion by the member for Stuart:

That this house—

(a) recognises the very important interrelationship between metropolitan Adelaide and the rural and remote regions of our state and

(b) acknowledges that the equitable provision of resources to and the development of both are necessary for our state's economic and social success now and into the future.

That is the motion I support, but I note the amendment to paragraph (b) moved by the member for Frome, which reads:

(b) supports the balanced provision of resources that recognises the interdependence of metropolitan and rural areas of South Australia and takes into account local needs and priorities as a basis for our economic and social success now and into the future.

That is quite interesting, because it really does not change anything of the original motion; it is just the Labor Party trying to put their brand on this excellent motion by the member for Stuart. Perhaps the Labor Party could just concentrate on putting more effort into the regions instead of doing ridiculous changes to motions, and actually recognise what does happen in the regions.

I am bitterly disappointed in the actions of the member for Frome (Minister for Regional Development) in his vote on marine parks. When he addressed fishermen and their families at Port Wakefield, he said that he knew that the locals would help make the best decisions. Certainly, in that case, he did not listen to the locals, and we now have a very poor situation where fisheries right across the state area heavily impacted by these sanctuary zones.

We were only going to take 12 out of the situation and bring it back to 72 no-take zones instead of 84. The minister has got the Labor Party to agree to an impact study in 12 months' time on what happens with keeping the sanctuary zones as they are. Well, that is far too late, because my information is that it is already having a devastating effect on fishing families and communities.

Not that I want to see suicides happen, but I wonder if the breakdown and summary of the regional impact statement will come back and tell us how many people have suicided because of this poor decision, how many people have left the state because of this poor decision, and how many people have just packed up their businesses because of this poor decision. That is when that will really reflect on not just the Labor Party but also the member for Frome, who is the so-called regional development minister.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I just ask the member for Hammond to address the motion and not reflect—

Mr PEDERICK: I am; I am talking about regional development in that last sentence.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: —on other members. Thank you, member for Hammond.

Mr PEDERICK: That is very important for the historical record—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Hammond.

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your instruction. I also note that the member for Frome (the Labor Minister for Regional Development) said he has $39 million for the regions. Well, that is fantastic. When we went to the electorate, we put up $139 million of regional policy, and these included policies with regard to giving councils money that would help prop up loans and would have generated somewhere between $500 million and $1 billion of input into the regions. But, no, that obviously was not good enough when the member for Frome was making his decision.

Mr Whetstone: The Labor member for Frome.

Mr PEDERICK: That's right.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It is not orderly to interject, and it is not orderly to reflect on other members, so I just draw the member for Hammond back to the debate.

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to acknowledge the massive input that farming puts into this state right throughout our regions. We have dryland farming, irrigated farming, and wine from our great vineyards. Many billions of dollars goes in, and all of this has to be freighted through to Adelaide.

The member for Chaffey quite rightly talked about the potential demise of the Mallee railway lines. If that happens, I believe it will be a very retrograde step. I know that a deal has been cut between Genesee Wyoming and Viterra in regard to keeping those lines open. It is because these lines are in a terrible state of disrepair that trains have to go so slow and work during the night on hot days—because of the temperature rating of these lines. I am really worried, and I have mentioned in this place before about the extra truck movements. There could be 10,000 extra truck movements in regard to this rail going off the lines.

If anyone has been up the Mallee roads, like the member for Chaffey and I have been many times, they will understand how dangerous it is. There are no overtaking lanes. There are many corners. In fact, I have mentioned before that when the road to Lameroo and Pinnaroo from Tailem Bend was being constructed, I think they were paid to put corners in. It just twists and turns, there are S-bends all along the length for many kilometres. It would just add further issues for people who live in the Mallee.

I note that the member for Chaffey talked about the access down at the South Eastern Freeway. It is a corner and a hill coming down from the ranges into Adelaide. I have come down there thousands of times. There have been some horrific accidents there. We have seen the sad loss of life of innocent people when out-of-control trucks have come down the freeway.

I knew (through football) the man from Pinnaroo who tragically died when he lost control of a B-double coming down the freeway, hitting the wall on the other side of Cross Road. I believe that, instead of a 60 km/h limit, for the sake of safety, we might have the same situation as what happened at the long, steep roads in Wollongong and Perth. There may have to be some discussion, and there may have been some discussion at industry level, about bringing the speed limit down to 40 km/h.

At the Wollongong hill—and I cannot remember the name of the exact road; I have met with a truck driver who used to traverse it many times—the speed limit had to be changed because they did not even have a separating barrier between the lanes. The truck driver witnessed a major accident, where a truck went over into oncoming traffic and killed a family plus two friends of the driver's young daughters who were in the car.

The South Eastern Freeway to Adelaide is a freight route and passenger vehicles can obviously use that route as well, and people need to understand that. It is a vital part of our regional economy and a vital part of our interdependence between rural South Australia and the city. Other drivers have talked to me about B-doubles that may have loads of ice cream containers, for instance, and this happens. They might only weigh three or four tonnes, if that, and they can go down a bit faster but, for the sake of safety, it may get to a stage where a 40 km/h speed limit for heavy vehicles is instigated.

On another issue, I recognise what the mining industry does for this state. I certainly recognise the issue of the Strzelecki Track. I used to work in the Cooper Basin 30 years ago. The Strz has not moved forward much since those times. A couple of years ago on a trip up through Innamincka, I noticed that several sections of several kilometres of road are bitumen. I think they are in the wetter spots. This is for overtaking—where they do not have bulldust—B-doubles or semitrailers heading up to the Cooper Basin. It is a bit sad that I am running out of time. However, this is a vital road that needs work. When we were up there it was wet, and we had to go out to the Queensland side and take a 1,200 kilometre detour to get home.

If we want to make sure that oil and gas companies have their operations out of Adelaide, to head up to Moomba instead of coming out of Brisbane, we need to make sure that road is upgraded in the near future, otherwise we will lose many opportunities from this state. As I said, that road really has not improved too much since I was working up there 30 years ago.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (12:40): I would like to make some comments in support of the motion that the member for Stuart brings to the house. I commend the member for Stuart for moving this motion. We know he is a very passionate representative of rural South Australia and that is reflected in the support he receives from his constituents. I am inspired to speak to the motion because I think it is most relevant to the electorate that I represent in this place, being the outstanding electorate of Kavel. Kavel is really the interface, it crosses the divide, if you like, between metropolitan Adelaide and the rural regions of the state.

If we are not already there, we are fast becoming—I am talking about the town of Mount Barker—what could be described as a satellite suburb of metropolitan Adelaide, particularly given the decision the government took three or so years ago to rezone all of that land, quite controversially I might add, that 3,000 acres of land around the perimeter of the existing township of Mount Barker to full residential development. Prior to that the town was experiencing some challenges, but that decision has brought on significantly more challenges in relation to the provision of services and infrastructure to that part of the hills district. While I stand in this place as the member for Kavel I will continue to hammer away at the continual need for services and infrastructure for, particularly, the towns of Mount Barker, Littlehampton and Nairne because that is where the significant residential development has taken place.

We have seen the government provide some level of improvement in services and infrastructure, being its commitment, together with the local council. I would like to commend the local council for their continued efforts in seeing the commitment from the state government and also my colleague in the federal parliament, the Hon. Jamie Briggs, assistant minister for transport and infrastructure, in funding for the second interchange, the Bald Hills Road interchange, which will see some big improvements in traffic management and the like in what I call the tri-town district of Mount Barker, Littlehampton and Nairne. Those three towns will be impacted in a positive way with the construction of the second interchange.

We have seen some development at the local hospital where the maternity wing has been expanded, and not before time, can I say. We were getting to a point, if we were not already there, where women were having to travel to metropolitan Adelaide to have their babies because the maternity section at the Mount Barker Hospital was at and exceeding capacity. We have recently seen the opening of an expansion of that facility, which was necessary. We have seen two park-and-rides built in Mount Barker, and again not before time. The second park-and-ride at Dumas Street certainly was not before time because the day the Dutton Road Mount Barker Railway Station park-and-ride was built and opened it was at capacity. So, not before time with the Dumas Street park-and-ride being opened.

When we move further away from Mount Barker to the east, the country opens up into the rural region of the state. The Bremer Valley out through Monarto is open farming and grazing country. Even though we have some very important horticulture and viticulture industry within the Hills district, which is regarded as rural primary production, when we move further east to what is regarded as the back of the Adelaide Hills, the Eastern Mount Lofty Ranges, it does open up, as I said, into the Bremer Valley and out across the Murray Plains through the Monarto-Brinkley district into the rural regions of South Australia. This is an example of how the Kavel electorate really crosses that divide between metropolitan Adelaide and the rural region of the state.

The member for Stuart brings to the house very important issues. I will be very quick, because I know we need to get on to other business on the Notice Paper. I did have the pleasure of travelling into the member for Goyder's electorate on the weekend and I just want to quickly talk about the condition of some of our rural roads. It has been my opinion that, instead of the government putting money into improving our rural and regional roads, their default position is to reduce the speed limit. If that road to Kadina was in a good state, I do not think there is any reason why it could not be posted at 110 km/h.

It is the same in other electorates. The road between Spalding and Jamestown is 100 km/h and, if that road was brought up to a decent, satisfactory level, there is no reason that could not be posted at 110 km/h, but what we see is the government reduce them back to 100 km/h, which I think is the wrong move for regional South Australia. With those few comments, I certainly support the motion the member for Stuart brings to the house.

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (12:46): I also rise to support the motion and, really, I think it encapsulates the reason I sought the opportunity to be in this place. I am a proud child of a regional community. I have lived in a variety of regional communities. I live in a town of 1,000 people and it is the biggest place I have ever lived in. I have the great opportunity now to represent others which means travelling to be in Adelaide so many times, probably about 140 nights a year, so I live that interrelationship that exists between regional and metropolitan areas. I am not sure whether it is a dream come true or a nightmare that has become realised, but it is what we live in now.

I think this is a wonderful motion because it emphasises the importance of the relationship that needs to exist. I know that in my communities, many of which are in coastal areas, I have up to 40 per cent non-resident property owners. That shows me that no matter where people may primarily reside, on occasion they choose to visit other areas and that is where the interrelationship is very strong. It has been part of South Australia's past and it is important that policy decisions, legislative decisions and budget decisions recognise that.

That is part of the reason why, when the opportunity was presented to me in 2005 to stand for preselection and be elected as a parliamentarian, I took it. I believe in it very strongly. I think this is a good motion, and I am not sure why the member for Frome has moved the amendment. It seems to me a slight play on words, which has the same intent, but I look forward to its passage and I look forward to future parliaments where whoever is in power ensures that the needs of all South Australians are considered in every decision they make.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (12:48): I am grateful for the support for this motion. With regard to the member for Frome's amendment of behalf of the government, I am really a bit bewildered why the government felt the need to ask him to change 'acknowledges that the equitable provision of resources to and the development of both are necessary for our state's economic and social success now and into the future' to 'supports the balanced provision of resources that recognises the interdependence of metropolitan and rural areas of South Australia and takes into account local needs and priorities as a basis for our economic and social success now and into the future'. That smacks of exactly the same intent and so it smacks of just trying to be difficult, which is a great shame. Since the words have the same intent, we will certainly support that amendment.

Let me just finish as I started. This is about recognising both. This is not about trying to say that one is more important than the other. Regional people value Adelaide enormously and metropolitan people should value regional areas enormously. We need each other and we cannot survive without each other.

Very important industries like small business, defence industries, manufacturing, innovation, mineral resources and energy require both metropolitan and regional presence. Very important services like Aboriginal affairs, health, education, transport, disabilities and housing must be provided equitably to both regional and metropolitan people. Regions are nothing without Adelaide; Adelaide is nothing without regions. Our state needs both and our governments, now and into the future, should provide resources fairly for both.

Amendment carried; motion as amended carried.

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