HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)
2014-11-12 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

State Budget

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (15:20): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and you honour us with your presence, not that I am reflecting on such. I rise today to try to bring some different information into a debate that has been running since the federal and state budgets and the recent debate about the need to scrap the emergency service levy remissions, which would bring about $90 million to the government. I wanted to put that $90 million per annum tax increase into perspective. What I want to put aside first off is the fact that in 2014 the state government blew out its own budget by $311 million, or the fact that the Treasurer's own budget was blown by $15 million or, indeed, that the emergency services minister's own budget was $26 million over, not underlying the fact that maybe there are more prudent ways for this government to manage its own budget.

I wanted to talk about a number of items that the public and I would consider as waste. I am somebody who regularly goes to my local pub and enacts the pub test, and there are some things that have not passed muster. First off with those is the revolving door and separation package payouts this government has had to pay out because of its own ineptitude. The Department of the Premier and Cabinet has, after the election, cleaned out 15 ministerial advisers at a total cost of $714,000 (there is an item where we could save a bit of money). The fact is that Rod Hook's separation package was over half a million dollars, Fred Hansen's was almost $400,000 and Lino Di Lernia's was about $450,000.

If we leave those aside, this government's idea that government advertising is a fantastic spend of money really needs to be put into perspective when we look at the harsh household budgets that are being affected by these emergency services levy increases. The government's big build advertising campaign, at a cost of $180,000 to the taxpayer, or the government's politically motivated campaign against the federal budget cuts of $1.1 million—$1.1 million—prove that there is plenty of money that we can save, not underlying the fact that the government has spent $267.9 million giving TVSPs to 2,325 people, but at the same time total general government sector employment has increased by 1,898 FTEs. I do not understand how you can voluntary separate 2,000 people but still increase by 2,000 people. I think the maths there is a little bit skewed.

I think that is $267.9 million that this government could have saved by being a little bit smarter about the way they have gone about it. The fact is that almost every single IT project that this government has undertaken has blown out. EPAS has blown out by $54 million, with a potential for $100 million worth of blowout. The fact is that RISTEC was originally billed for $22.6 million and is now at $54.1 million, but at the same time it will not be able to administer the taxes that it originally said it would; in fact, its scope has reduced even though its cost has doubled.

I will talk about the ongoing saga that is CASIS. I know that the member for Morphett dreads estimates every year when he has to come in here and get another blowout figure from the minister in relation to this. It started off as a $600,000 project and has turned into a $5.8 million behemoth, and the stupid thing is that it has not even been implemented properly. It has blown out almost 10 times its original cost, yet it still has not actually delivered what it said it would deliver. You really do question whether or not this government can deliver.

I would also like to point out some of the very political decisions of this government. If the member for Waite wants to talk about his independence, about him being part of a prudent, financial government that manages its budget well and is delivering to the people of South Australia, I think he should look no further than the $8.4 million that this government is spending by increasing its frontbench and giving him an office—$8.4 million. I find that spending an absolute disgrace.

There have been plenty of opportunities for this government to save money. We have talked about the More Than Cars advertising campaign worth $450,000, and I understand there are plenty of spare T-shirts to go around. We have talked about the Adelaide Oval acceleration, which cost the state government $600,000, which in the end was a complete waste of money, on top of the money that was spent on bringing the Rolling Stones here in the first place. But the kicker, Deputy Speaker, is the $130,000 that we spent advertising Adelaide to Adelaideans.

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