HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-05-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Majors Road Upgrade

Mr SPEIRS (Black—Leader of the Opposition) (14:18): My question is to the Premier. Has the Premier told the federal Labor leader that a major road infrastructure project to which they have both committed $60 million each, $120 million in funding, has been rejected by a South Australian government commissioned feasibility study as not justified in economic terms?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (14:18): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I, too, join the Treasurer, as I mentioned earlier, in congratulating him on his elevation to the important office in our state of Leader of the Opposition. I wish him well and it is good that he is here today.

Again, it won't surprise the Leader of the Opposition or anyone else in this place that I am very excited about the proposition of working with a federal government that wants to make investments in important pieces of infrastructure, whether they be health infrastructure or road infrastructure. The Majors Road proposition, which I understand the Leader of the Opposition is referring to, is one that our government is committed to. When we make election commitments we are going to deliver upon them.

We know there have been previous commitments made to the Majors Road on/off ramp proposition and we know there have been a large number of representations made. Indeed, there have been strong advocates for this project. I know the federal member for Kingston desperately wants to see this happen. I know the member for Davenport is very supportive of this project. I know the member for Gibson is desperate to see action with respect to traffic relief from Brighton Road, to actually be realised rather than talked about.

But there are other key members of this parliament who have been proponents of this project in another lifetime, and that of course is the Leader of the Opposition himself. In fact, I understand the Leader of the Opposition once identified this as a number one priority. Your priority is our priority.

There is one alarming element to what has occurred over recent days. I think we are starting to see the fault lines emerge in terms of how the opposition is going to conduct itself because—

Mr GARDNER: Point of order, sir: standing order 98, the substance of the question. This is not germane information and the Premier is clearly debating when he is describing fault lines in another political party. There is clearly absolutely no substance to what the member is now presenting.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will give the Premier an opportunity to show how this discussion is relevant.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: South Australians know this parliament can work really effectively if we work in a bipartisan way on the things that we agree upon. I would have thought that if the opposition was looking for an opportunity to be bipartisan and constructive on some issues it might be on the Leader of the Opposition's number one priority.

I thought if we could achieve agreement on anything it was going to be his number one priority. A couple of weeks into opposition and it turns out not so. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition now is an active antagonist of a proposition that he once supported.

Mr GARDNER: Point of order, sir. The question was very clear: it was about whether the Premier had provided advice to the Leader of the Opposition federally about a feasibility study. The presentation now is pure debate and directly opposite to standing order 98.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I understood the answer has provided some context, which I will allow.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: For the benefit of the Leader of Opposition Business in this place, of course I spoke to the federal leader of the Australian Labor Party when seeking their support for this project and their commitment to co-invest with the state Labor government. That was of course before there was a state Labor government, and they have made such a commitment, so this will only be realised in the eventuality of a federal Labor government, which will be up to the people of South Australia and Australia to determine. But, yes, of course I spoke to him and advised him of the fact that this is a project that we thought enjoyed bipartisan support potentially.

I also advised him of the fact that this is a project that so many people in the southern suburbs want to see. We know that with a multibillion-dollar investment in the north-south corridor as a result of the former government's actions, and consistent with this government's intentions, with that sort of multibillion-dollar commitment, we want people to be able to use the road, including in suburbs such as Sheidow Park, Trott Park and Hallett Cove.

We also know that any analysis of this proposition in the past was potentially done in the context that the Hove level crossing project was going to eventuate as well. That project was committed to and then of course backflipped on and dumped, which has left Brighton Road in a rather perilous position, with growing demand for that road without adequate investment. So we are committed to this investment and we are going to make sure it happens should federal Labor win.

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