HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-05-26 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Electoral (Ban on Corflutes) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 31 March 2021.)

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Minister for Environment and Water) (10:32): I rise this morning to make a very brief contribution to the Electoral (Ban on Corflutes) Amendment Bill, a bill for which I have very significant support for a range of reasons, but largely because I know that is the position of my community in the electorate seat of Black.

I have surveyed, spoken and listened to many of the people who live in suburbs like Hallett Cove, Seacliff, Marino, Sheidow Park, Trott Park and Seaview Downs, and the vast majority tell me they are sick of the visual pollution created by election posters at election time. They are sick of the distraction they cause along our main thoroughfares.

Also, as we become increasingly environmentally aware and see the very significant leadership that the state of South Australia is taking in reducing our ecological footprint and reducing the generation of plastic waste, they want to see these election posters disappear, not just from a visual pollution point of view but also because of their generation of unnecessary plastics.

As the local member for Black and also in my capacity as the state Minister for Environment and Water, with a role in pushing forward the policy agenda around the reduction in plastic pollution and plastic waste, I support this from a policy point of view and from an environmental sustainability sense.

I have been in and around politics now for the best part of a decade. I have been involved in putting up posters with my face on them, for better or worse, along Brighton Road, Majors Road, Ocean Boulevard, Lonsdale Road and Main South Road. My electorate seems to have lots of major arterial roads and, as a consequence, I have felt the need in the past to put up lots of posters. Part of that is because if I did not do that, whether I liked it or not, my political opponent would have put up lots of them and then people would ask, 'Where has David Speirs gone? Is he not standing?'

In my view, there is a need to level the playing field and create a much greater sense of electoral equality by removing these posters from public property, from Stobie poles, from telegraph poles, from pieces of public infrastructure where it is currently allowed and appropriate to display election posters. Let's get rid of them and encourage candidates and members of parliament to use alternative means.

We are in the electronic age now; it is 2021. There are lots of opportunities to get our message across via social media, via electronic newsletters. There is obviously still a place for mail and paper material as well, but of course nothing beats those face-to-face interactions on the doorstep, in the supermarket, on the street corner and at events around our electorates.

I strongly support this legislation. I think the general direction of it is appropriate. It will be welcomed across South Australia and I know that it will be welcomed in the southern suburbs of Adelaide I am privileged to represent. I look forward to seeing this legislation move forward into law in some form or another in the coming months.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning and Local Government) (10:36): I thank the member for Waite for introducing this bill. I acknowledge the powerful contribution just made by one of our generation Ys—I think you are, not X. He is a generation Y, he is that young; he is nearly into the Z category. Here we have the voice of youth in our parliament making a contribution and telling us why, in the 21st century, this bill is important. I wholly endorse what has been presented.

I want to thank the member for Waite for progressing this part of the reform. It has certainly been the intention of the government to get rid of corflutes, and we have made that very clear publicly. The Electoral (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill, which was an ill-fated bill, with OPV and corflutes and a number of other very important reforms, did not progress from the other place. I do not in any way reflect on their vote in that regard but just note the fact that it did not progress. The member for Waite has quickly adopted the provisions for the banning of corflutes in this bill as its single purpose, and I thank him for doing that. I hope that those in the other place recognise the significance of this part of the reform, which really must be advanced.

Incidentally, I should point out that the Local Government Association, in relation to their advocacy in this regard, are also keen to get rid of corflutes and for it to be part of their reforms, which is of course under consideration. Again, I do not want to present that further, other than to say that this is an important advance. The main relatively minor difference in this bill from the previous proposal presented is that the proposed number of corflutes within the 50-metre zone outside polling booths is now six per candidate or group. We note that and that is absolutely fine.

Those of us represented in this house are the Liberal Party of Australia (SA Division), the Australian Labor Party and, of course, the Independents, who have had various affiliations in the past. We acknowledge that other political parties are also represented in the other place and form part of our total parliament. Whether you are an Independent or whether you are a member of a small, medium or large party, in the sense of its numerical membership, you will be able to have the same number: six corflutes within that 50-metre zone for polling day and for the pre-poll services.

We accept that. It does produce some equity. I hope, for all of us who have been involved in elections—and many of us who will continue to be—that that will ensure we minimise that midnight or 1am flurry for polling days to be able to capture the most advantageous points—

Ms Bedford: When was the last time you put up a corflute?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: You would be surprised.

The SPEAKER: The Deputy Premier won't respond to interjections.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Further to those early morning attendances, you then wait patiently to ensure that your secured spot is not sabotaged by some other candidate between then and 8am. This will be the end of that sort of nonsense, and we will be able to accept that there is an equitable and reasonable presentation, whatever the level of attractiveness of the picture on the poster you are going to present. We will have some equity in that regard.

I think the public will accept that as an important initiative on election day, that they are not in some way being bombarded, especially where there are very significant numbers of candidates standing for election. That is a double-edged benefit. Most importantly, it is an opportunity for environmental reform which, frankly, is advocated for by not only the Y generation but also the Minister for Environment, who has a special interest, expertise and understanding in this area. I think that is reflective across the generations.

Polypropylene is not widely recycled, with only two main recycling methods: mechanical recycling, which is complicated due to concerns around food contact and separating types of plastics, and recycling through chemical methods to break down the corflute. Beyond the corflute itself, the cable ties and other fixtures that are required to suspend the corflutes often get cut and left on the ground. So we have environmental impact in its production, its display, its removal, its disposal and all the bits and pieces that go with it.

I know that some of us, over the years, have donated second-hand corflutes to schools to cut up and use as art supplies—

The Hon. D.C. van Holst Pellekaan: Good for tree planting as well.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Good for tree planting, yes. In fact, you can use either a milk carton around a tree plant or a bit of corflute, which is pretty good. Interestingly, last week I was in the Northern Territory and they use a product that looks exactly like corflutes—but without our lovely pictures on them—as a book secure area.

In particular, the Strehlow foundation in Alice Springs decided during COVID that they would act to try to preserve a number of their books, so they created, out of what is corflute material, outdoor boxes for special records. I had a chance to have a look at the beautiful, tiny Frieda Strehlow diary from the 1800s, which was to be specially preserved in its own little box. I was surprised to see that, and I thought, 'Goodness, there's one useful use of the corflute material.' It is designed to keep and preserve those for future generations. Otherwise, I would say corflutes are very limited in their application and are a blight in terms of being able to re-use and recycle them.

There are some parts of our state that have not involved themselves in the use of corflutes, and one of them is my home territory of Kangaroo Island. In the 1970s, everyone would have a banner up around polling day saying to vote for whoever their favourite candidate or party was. There were also a few things on cars and things of that nature, but there was no corflute uptake. At the time, moving into the 1980s when suddenly there were all these corflutes everywhere, as a local community they decided it was not for them. They did not think they should be on their roads, attached to their trees, stuck to Stobie poles or displayed in their towns. They just did not have them.

It was agreed between the candidates. I think the current member for Mawson used them in the last election, which was a bit of a break from tradition, and I think other candidates therefore took that up. Nevertheless, largely that has been respected and democracy has not fallen apart. There have still been people elected in those regions. There has not been some groundswell of civil unrest as a result of not being able to see the picture of their favoured candidate hanging on a tree or on a Stobie pole.

Critically, in that regard, the forms of communication that we have now in 2021 that we did not have in 1980 mean that the information source is not public meetings and corflutes alone. We have a massive number of other electronic means upon which we can get immediate, reliable and quite extensive information about prospective candidates and the policies that they are standing for at the touch of a phone.

So I would encourage members to support this legislation to ban the use of corflutes on public roads for environmental, public safety and cost reasons, and of course due to the availability of other methods of communication, and to end this blight on our political horizon during elections.

Mr BROWN: I move:

That the debate be adjourned.

The house divided on the motion:

Ayes 21

Noes 19

Majority 2

AYES
Bedford, F.E. Bell, T.S. Bettison, Z.L.
Boyer, B.I. Brock, G.G. Brown, M.E. (teller)
Close, S.E. Cook, N.F. Duluk, S.
Ellis, F.J. Gee, J.P. Hildyard, K.A.
Hughes, E.J. Malinauskas, P. Michaels, A.
Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K. Picton, C.J.
Stinson, J.M. Szakacs, J.K. Wortley, D.
NOES
Basham, D.K.B. Chapman, V.A. Cowdrey, M.J.
Cregan, D. Gardner, J.A.W. Harvey, R.M. (teller)
Knoll, S.K. Luethen, P. McBride, N.
Murray, S. Patterson, S.J.R. Pederick, A.S.
Pisoni, D.G. Sanderson, R. Speirs, D.J.
Treloar, P.A. van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Whetstone, T.J.
Wingard, C.L.
PAIRS
Bignell, L.W.K. Marshall, S.S. Koutsantonis, A.
Tarzia, V.A. Piccolo, A. Power, C.

Motion thus carried; debate adjourned.

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