HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-04-29 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Supply Bill 2025

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Mr TELFER (Flinders) (16:16): Thank you for the opportunity to continue my remarks on the Supply Bill 2025. For those who were tuned in before the break, I was reflecting on the narrative that has been coming out of the government, and how unfortunately the reports that they have been relying on for a number of months now to try to talk up what they are doing in the business space have been sadly superseded by an overwhelming number of reports from agencies such as NAB, the CommSec report and Deloitte that are highlighting the challenges that businesses in particular, and South Australians in general, are facing at the moment under this Malinauskas Labor government and their mate Anthony Albanese's federal Labor government.

The concerns that are being articulated from this side of the chamber, specifically around some of the business confidence numbers, have been magnified by some of these latest results. It was interesting to hear the answer to a question in question time where the Premier, when asked about South Australia slipping down the ranking of the CommSec State of the States report, tried to lean into any aspect of positivity from that report. But the reality of what that report now says is that South Australia is well and truly back in the pack, or even at the back of the pack, when it comes to comparisons with our interstate cousins.

The significant drop in business confidence that is being faced at the moment is starting to really impact across the community. This challenge that we are facing at the moment in South Australia in particular, with the lowest number across the country of investment back into business capital, should be ringing alarm bells for this government. It means that businesses around South Australia do not have the confidence to be putting money back into their businesses.

I spoke of a quote specifically from a business owner involved with the South Australian Business Council survey, where they pointed specifically at some of the red tape and regulations that they are having to face and saying that, indeed, it is not worth running a business in South Australia with the amount of red tape that they are having to face. As I said, this should be ringing an alarm bell for this government, because South Australia is a small business state. We have businesses at the moment that are feeling the pinch, and unfortunately the number of business closures that we have seen in South Australia is at the highest point since COVID.

These sorts of challenges and the reports that have been presented on business confidence and the like should be a wake-up call to this government that they need to be doing more. They need to be listening to the business community in particular, because it is hard to see business confidence numbers falling much further given that the South Australian Business Chamber has had business confidence in negative territory for 12 consecutive quarters; this is not a new thing. While the Premier is on his fiddle trying to create a song that might distract people away from these challenges, unfortunately, Rome is burning.

No wonder business confidence has tanked. The South Australian Business Chamber found that general business conditions in South Australia declined for the fourth consecutive quarter and have declined in five of the last six quarters. At 81.9 points, conditions are at their lowest point since the June quarter of 2020 at the height of the pandemic. General business conditions have declined rapidly: 13.8 points in the last year and 20.8 points in the last two years. This is from a Premier who likes to talk about his business credentials. He likes to put himself forward as a friend to the business community. Maybe that promise is as hollow as his promise that we were reminded of during question time about fixing ramping: all talk and no delivery.

It is not just that: it is also the escalating levels of debt that we are facing as a state. Not very often do you go around South Australia and people bring up state debt with you. Often the discussion is around concerns with the debt that has been racked up by our federal government, but more and more, people are starting to realise that the level of state debt that we are getting to is out of control. If you compare it with previous state debts, with the State Bank debt that was being faced by us as a state, in today's dollars it is exponentially worse now than it was then.

We did learn from the Mid-Year Budget Review that there was an extra $3 billion of additional revenue from taxation, but that only amounted to a small surplus to go with record debt levels. State debt in that Mid-Year Budget Review had increased by $1.8 billion and will total $46 billion by 30 June 2028. I am sure, as we start to consider what the next budget is going to look like, that number will be over $50 billion. The Premier today spoke about how great it is to have a million people in the workforce. If we have a state debt of $50 billion, that is a lot of money for each and every one of those workers to be responsible for paying back at some stage.

At the moment, despite boasting of record revenue, this government has no debt management plan. When they were in opposition, the now Premier made a lot of noise about the need for government to have a debt management plan in place. He made it their point of difference. That was at a time when state debt was significantly less than it is now. What do we hear from the Premier? Nothing at all. This government continually has failed to appropriately address many of the major challenges that have been faced by our state, especially some of the challenges, opportunities and concerns confronted by regional South Australia.

The Premier, when he was in opposition, made a point of the need for there to be a debt management plan in place. As I said, it was at a time when debt was significantly lower than it is now. The debt that has been racked up in just a few short years by this Labor government is significantly more than that, yet still they have not brought in place any sort of debt management plan. Where are the savings targets across non-vital government agencies? Where is the plan to be able to pay back the debt that has been accumulated?

We see that government spending is out of control. Government departments are out of control. We have seen that with the significant budget blowouts across portfolio areas; it is not just isolated to one or two. Right across portfolio areas, right across departments, we have seen budget blowouts, budget escalation. There seems to be no respect from this government and its departments for the taxpayers of South Australia. It is spend, spend, spend, not just for taxpayers now but for taxpayers in the future. How long into the future? We do not know because there is no plan to actually ever pay back this debt, and that attitude towards departmental overspend and government inefficiencies is only costing South Australians more and putting upward pressure on inflation.

It was fascinating to hear the commentary from those who are charged with trying to make decisions with the Reserve Bank to put constriction, downward pressure, on inflation. They highlighted that government spending at both federal and state levels is only pushing the inflation rate up. During a cost-of-living crisis, we need to be fully aware of the impacts of these decisions that are made by ministers, by department heads and by department staff down the line, and what impact that is actually having on South Australian families who are doing it tough during a cost-of-living crisis.

We have seen some examples of department budget overspends but there is none greater than the blowout of the health budget. In the Mid-Year Budget Review we saw that there was a blowout of $627 million. That is $627 million more than when the budget was handed down, and it is not just that. There continues to be massive growing concern about the cost and delivery of the new Women's and Children's Hospital. This is only going to put more pressure on South Australia's rapidly escalating debt levels.

Yet what have the outcomes been? What have the health outcomes been? We have seen ambulance ramping numbers balloon even more. They are now at almost inconceivable levels: more than double what they were, near on triple what they were, when this government came in with the promise that they would fix the ramping crisis. Remember those words? We are here to remind the government that they made that promise that they would fix the ramping crisis, yet those numbers are significantly higher, and South Australians are rightly asking, 'When are you going to come through? When are you going to keep your promise?'

This government has made promises to get power, yet they cannot use that power effectively to drive the necessary change which actually matches these promises. Not only that, but we are seeing significant challenges, like I said, with some of the health delivery in regional South Australia. We have been calling on this side of the chamber for there to be a boost to the Patient Assistance Transport Scheme, the scheme that is relied on by 6,000 claimants—that was the last number—for regional people to get the level of service that their city cousins have in order to travel significant distances. From my electorate, for instance, it can be 500, 600, 700 or 800 kilometres and multiple plane flights. These are the challenges that they are facing because the health system is not delivering the equivalent level of service.

People in regional South Australia do not expect there to be the same standard, but there needs to be a standard and it needs to be something that we strive for as decision-makers. When that standard is not reached within regional centres, we need to have a scheme that appropriately and adequately reflects the true cost that is borne by people in regional South Australia to get that level of health care when they visit major centres, especially Adelaide.

On this side we are calling for that scheme to be ramped up, not just the fuel costs but also the overnight stay. When you have a compensation scheme that only gives back $40 for an overnight stay in Adelaide, $40 does not get you too many places where you can stay in Adelaide. This is why regional people are significantly out of pocket. When they put their claim in and they have stayed a night in a hotel or a motor inn or even a share house—whatever it might be—you can guarantee that the cost borne by them would be more than $40, sometimes exponentially more, and that is how much they get back from the PAT Scheme.

So this is something that I urge the health minister to consider. These are the sorts of measures that need to be in place to appropriately recognise and reflect the needs of the community and to be listening to the people of regional South Australia. The PAT Scheme needs to be something that is a priority for this government.

We have also seen the burdening of GPs with significant payroll tax obligations, which also has flow-on effects—significant flow-on effects, indeed—to South Australians. The government spin is that they are listening to GPs. If that was true, they would have been hearing the same thing that we have been hearing for the last 12 to 18 months: that this decision from the Labor government to enforce this payroll tax ruling on GP clinics is going to mean that people are going to be paying more to go to their GPs.

It is going to make health care less affordable for the average South Australian and because of this there will be more pressure on the emergency departments of hospitals all around our state. During a cost-of-living crisis, this is the reaction of this government. It is not in the too-hard basket because we have seen examples interstate of governments making the right decision to properly reflect what the expectations of the community are. But this government seems to be hard of hearing. They seem to have no care or concern when it comes to South Australian families doing it tough.

Not just that, we have also been calling for a long time for the Premier to put in place appropriate incentives to attract and retain healthcare workers like what is on offer interstate. It does not matter at the moment how much cash is thrown out there about health announcements if we cannot actually have the health professionals in those service areas to actually staff the workforce needs that the health system has at the moment.

If we are competing with our cousins interstate, with governments that are putting incentives in place for healthcare workers, what chance do we have in South Australia to attract those sorts of healthcare workers if we do not have similar incentives in place? The health system—absolutely, it is a massive challenge and it is one which the government put front and centre in their last election campaign, one in which they said to people, 'Vote for us like your life depends on it.' Well, lives are depending on there being an appropriately resourced but also delivered health system and unfortunately, at every step along the way, this Labor government has not kept its promises.

A challenge is also being faced at the moment when it comes to housing, and some of the numbers that we are seeing coming through in a lot of the reports looking at the housing system are really concerning. It takes 11.8 years in Adelaide to save a 20 per cent deposit. It is the second longest in the nation. When South Australia, which normally had its competitive advantage of affordability when compared to the Eastern States, is as bad or worse than our cousins interstate, that is when we have a significant issue.

So we are the second longest in the nation to actually be able to afford to save for a deposit, only behind New South Wales. We are the most expensive place when it comes to comparative numbers to actually rent in the whole country. When we are worse than Sydney, Melbourne or even Brisbane, or Perth, or a regional centre, when we are worse here in South Australia, there should be alarm bells ringing well and truly for this government.

We have the highest percentage of household income required to service rental payments; that is, the amount of money that we need out of the average salary that we get is the highest in the nation. We have the second highest percentage of household income required to service a mortgage. If you are lucky enough to be able to get yourself in a position to buy a house and have a mortgage, well, we are now the second highest percentage of household income required to service that mortgage, only behind New South Wales.

When it comes to dwelling value to income ratio, once again, we are the second highest in the nation. There was a time when this was the competitive advantage South Australia had—those times are no more. It is nine times the median income to buy a median-value house. These should be areas where the government is putting in place proactive policies. It is not just about supply; it is about trying to work out what are the mechanisms that are within the capacity of a government to be able to put in place.

The Treasurer has publicly acknowledged at the Mid-Year Budget Review a $113 million increase in stamp duty revenue in the current financial year. That corresponds to massive increases in residential housing prices during a housing affordability crisis. The government is being advantaged by the challenges that have been faced by South Australians.

This significant surplus in revenue is at the cost of new home owners and businesses. It is a slap in the face, really, for those who have recently bought houses, many for the first time, and the Treasurer delights in the stamp duty pain. He is raking in that extra money. The government collects $37,830 in stamp duty from the average house in metropolitan Adelaide. That is more than $8,000 higher than when this government took power. In three short years, it is more than $8,000 more on the average house in the pockets of this government.

The state Liberal opposition have significant concerns about the lack of cost-of-living relief for both households and businesses. Adelaide is in a housing affordability crisis and is the least affordable capital in which to rent and the second least affordable to buy. Those numbers, once again, are really confronting. It is fascinating to have some of the debate, which has been had in this place, where decisions are made, to actually have less housing, when the Opposition are putting forward proposals which would open up more land.

We have a massive housing supply shortage here in South Australia, missing housing targets by 26 per cent, with an expected 34 per cent undersupply by 2029. South Australians are paying $237,000, which is 37 per cent of the total value of new house and land packages, on taxes, on regulatory costs and infrastructure charges—37 per cent of the cost of a new house and land package going to taxes, going to the cost of regulation, going to infrastructure charges. That is a significant acceleration, an acceleration of 90 per cent since 2019. Where is the relief from this government?

Aspiring home owners will need to fork out over $40,000 in stamp duty alone on the median house price in Adelaide. It is an increase of $11,000 since this government has come into power. Some of these numbers might seem dry, but if you are that person who is now having to find an extra $11,000 just to cover tax, to go into the pockets of the government, you can see why people are frustrated, you can see why community confidence is rattled and thus the flow-on effect for business confidence as well. There is some $65.9 million for public housing build commitments and $135.8 million for maintenance and building of 442 social housing units, but that $135 million is federal money. There is not the state investment into this as well, and it is pretty vague in social housing information.

Right across the chamber we hear from our constituents about the challenges of maintenance backlogs within housing across the state. It is often at the door of a local MP that people turn to when they have been so frustrated by the system. The system has let them down. Where do they turn to? They turn to the local MP. Some of the stories that I hear from my constituents—and, as I said, I am sure people right around this chamber hear similar stories—about the standards that people are having to put up with because of that maintenance backlog are significant.

There continues to be unanswered questions on water infrastructure to support not just the future housing development but even the existing water needs of South Australia. Over the last several months we saw what Labor are rolling out when they use the shadow of the ESCOSA process and the SA Water pricing mechanism to significantly raise the water bills of South Australians, right across our state, because of mismanagement and lack of planning for our current and future needs. The average South Australian household water bill this year increased by $80. People are having to find more money to go into the pockets of government during a cost-of-living crisis, when South Australians are feeling the pinch most.

The government seems to not care or ignores those concerns from South Australian families doing it tough. The government have said the increase is needed to help pay for their $1.5 billion worth of new mains water and sewerage connections for rapidly growing Adelaide suburbs. That is really code for the government has had its head in the sand, unfortunately, for many years when it comes to our infrastructure needs, because we have seen billions of dollars swathed out of SA Water throughout the years, propping up general revenue. South Australian governments have used SA Water as a cash cow rather than investing into the water needs of South Australians and now, unfortunately, our current communities, our current water bill payers, are paying the cost for it.

During a cost-of-living crisis we see some of the most basic essentials, like water, being jacked up by this Labor government. It seems like there is no concern from this government about those concerns from South Australian families that are really doing it tough. It is often asked, 'What would you do differently?' I have been proud of the way that the opposition has been putting forward alternatives or what we would do if we were in government to try to ease some of the pressures, to ease the burden on business, as I was saying before, the red tape, regulation and costs that businesses are having to face in South Australia.

What would we do? We would put forward a proposal to lift the payroll tax threshold and to have no payroll tax for apprentices and trainees. This is a proactive move because we know that with the raising of wages the equivalent payroll tax amount has not changed at all. The amount that businesses are paying their workers has gone up, but that threshold—that more and more small businesses are hitting—has not changed. It is bracket creep, just as we talked about with other taxation. That is exactly what is happening here with payroll tax. More and more businesses that never have considered themselves to be big enough to have to pay payroll tax are now hitting that threshold.

It is even amongst some of the hospitality businesses that are working under pretty thin margins: they reach a threshold and have to pay payroll tax, and not just from $1.5 million level onwards, but then that is wound back to a number which astounds people really. The amount of payroll tax that they are having to pay when they hit that threshold is significant. It really is an insidious tax. It is a tax which actually disincentivises businesses to expand. It disincentivises businesses to employ more people, because if you reach that threshold suddenly you are going to have to be putting significant dollars into the pockets of government.

For us, it is pretty clear: that threshold should be lifted. It should appropriately reflect the changes that businesses are facing. As well as that, there should not be payroll tax for apprentices and trainees; there should be a system in place that actually helps businesses when they are considering putting trainees and apprentices on, rather than one which only adds to that concern about the payroll tax burden. It is only the Liberal opposition that are putting forward a proposal to lift that payroll tax threshold in response to concerns of business right across South Australia. We are listening, the government is not.

As well as that, there needs to be more consideration of the stamp duty relief when it comes to first-home owners in particular. The concession on home builds the government has put in place but we are the only state without a concession for first-home buyers on existing homes. The challenge, as I said earlier when I was giving you some of those facts and figures when it comes to stamp duty, is that over one-third of the cost of what it takes to buy and build a new home goes into government taxes, regulation and infrastructure costs. These are the sorts of things that are within the control of the government.

You may talk about the impact that market changes and rising prices have—and absolutely that can be out of control—but over a third of the cost for a new home being government-led absolutely is the lever. We, on this side, think there needs to be more done when it comes to stamp duty relief for South Australians, especially those South Australians trying to get into their first home.

We, on this side, have been strong advocates for reversing the decision to enforce payroll tax on GPs. As I said, this has had a direct flow-on effect to the affordability of health care for South Australians. It is adding extra pressure on our emergency departments, which are obviously significantly strained, significantly more under this government. To reverse that decision to enforce a payroll tax on GPs would be saying to doctors and their patients all around South Australia that we are listening.

Why has this government not considered putting this in place permanently? Once again, as I say, it is not something which is in the too-hard basket because other jurisdictions are doing just that. These GPs are partners and contractors. They should not be included with the payroll tax grouping. We on this side would make that change.

As well as that, the amount of money that South Australians are now having to fork out for their SA Water bill is having a direct impact on what people can afford in life in general. That is why we are saying we need to ease the pressure on water bills. It should not be those existing customers that are having to bear the brunt of poor decisions made by previous governments about the lack of investment into water infrastructure. To force South Australians to pay an extra 3½ per cent above inflation—3½ per cent plus inflation—on their last SA Water bills is a pretty bitter pill to swallow for South Australian water bill payers: families and businesses all around South Australia. This is why we on this side say that pressure needs to be eased.

This is why we are putting forward these credible, proactive steps and policies that we say are reflective of what we are hearing from our communities right around the state. We are listening. We know that the challenges of the cost-of-living crisis at the moment are really starting to bite. We know the challenges for businesses trying to deal with government regulation and costs are really starting to hurt. This is why business confidence is so low. This is why people are coming to us and saying, 'We don't know how we're going to afford the next increase in our SA Water bill.' This is why businesses are saying, 'We don't want to employ an extra person, because we are going to reach that payroll tax threshold and it means we are going to be having to find tens of thousands of dollars to pay payroll tax over and above what we are already doing at the moment.'

This is real life for people having to experience it right across South Australia. These are mums and dads, these are individuals trying to work hard to get ahead who are consistently hearing a message from this government that, 'We are not listening. We are happy to take your extra stamp duty and we are happy to take your extra payroll tax without making any sorts of changes to the system that's in place.' On this side we say those changes need to be made.

As we consider this Supply Bill, we look at all the different aspects of what is necessary to fund government operations right around the state and some of the projects, which are nuanced, in particular, to regional South Australia. In my electorate I have been concerned—frustrated even—with the lack of vision for regional South Australia in particular. When the last Liberal government was in place here in South Australia a few years ago, we saw significant expenditure and investment into my region, into some of the infrastructure and roads in particular, which helped the businesses that are specifically export businesses, to be able to effectively get their product to market. It put in place measures which made travelling those long distances on our roads even safer.

The shoulder sealing that we saw on the Eyre Highway has dramatically changed the way that people can travel right across the western third of our state. If you have actually taken the time to drive the Eyre Highway now from Port Augusta all the way to the border, you can see the amount of money that the previous Liberal federal and state governments, in partnership, put into that road, that national highway, in particular the section from Kyancutta west, which is now a joy to drive.

I drive tens of thousands of kilometres a year and to do so on a road which is safer, wider and less confronting for caravans and heavy vehicles to have to traverse, saves lives. It saves some of the challenge and distress that is caused on some of these roads. The shoulder sealing on the Eyre Highway and the shoulder sealing on the Tod Highway, from Kyancutta down to Cummins, was a significant investment from the last Liberal government and it really has paid dividends. The overtaking lanes and the intersection upgrades on the Lincoln and the Tod highways have been a significant upgrade for my region.

When it comes to roadworks, one change that this government put in place in my electorate was one about which I do not think anyone within my electorate came to me and said, 'It is a good idea to do intersection upgrades on Liverpool Street in Port Lincoln.' Those upgrades were to take out a left-turn lane on significant roundabouts through the centre of Port Lincoln, and it was something which was roundly opposed right across the community.

The government heard that and the department heard that through their consultation. They heard that from me. I was on my feet several times in this place. I wrote to the minister and said, 'This is something which needs to be reversed. This change is actually going to make traffic movement in Port Lincoln worse.' Those concerns were not listened to. Sadly, we have actually seen exactly what my community and I as the local member predicted, and that is lesser outcomes for traffic movement, for freight movement, and—in some sort of perverted way—more dangerous situations for pedestrians.

It was under the guise of pedestrian safety that these changes were brought in place in Port Lincoln, but everything that I hear is that it has actually clogged up traffic, it has meant that there are more cars going through these intersections and it is actually a more dangerous situation. As the local member, I say to my community I am sorry: I am sorry that government has let you down with that decision, I am sorry that you have a poorer outcome because a department and a minister did not listen to that community concern. It is not good enough, and sadly this is the sort of thing that undermines people's confidence in bureaucracy and decision-making.

So, for me, I continue to urge the minister to look at potential investment into the road network right across regional South Australia, particularly in my own electorate. The shoulder sealing work that was done on the Tod Highway and the Eyre Highway which I spoke about is the sort of thing that needs to be rolled out more on the Flinders Highway. It has been encouraging to see some work done there on some of the more dangerous sweeping bends, but there is more work to be done on this section.

If you get the privilege of driving as much as I do up there between Streaky Bay and Ceduna, some of the drop-offs on those shoulders are really frightening. On a section south of Elliston, you can see a near-on foot (12-inch) drop—30 centimetres for those in the metric system—off the edge of the road. You can see why unfortunately people with caravans, people with heavy vehicles, are right on the edge of that road and have real concerns.

I sadly get to see some of the dash cam footage of some of the incidents and accidents that happen within my electorate, and too many are caused by not enough investment into the road network, especially with caravanners who are not used to having to traverse these roads and are having to deal with a wider footprint with their vehicle.

We also in regional South Australia need to see more investment into our health system. As I spoke about earlier with the PAT Scheme, the expectation for regional communities is not that the same level of service is delivered right across South Australia that is delivered here in Adelaide. We do not expect that. We do expect a standard to properly reflect the amount of money which regional South Australia put into the state and federal economy.

If we do not support the communities that are the economic powerhouse of our state, those communities are not going to be sustainable. We are not going to be in a position where those communities are still there in five, 10, 20 years to be able to provide that same economic uplift for the state if we do not invest into the basics to make sure that those communities are sustainable, and the health system in particular.

We have seen some of the struggles across my electorate of trying to get GPs and health professionals into our regional areas. There are the concerns of the local community when decisions are made from outside that community which directly impact health delivery, and I have real concerns when it comes to any steps that actually lessen health care within our regional communities.

My continual urge to the state government is, 'Don't turn your back on providing adequate health care within our regional communities, some of our more far-flung regional communities, which put so much into our economy.' We need to be investing into the foundations of those communities to ensure the quality and the sustainability of them.

Any opportunity that I get on my feet here in this place, I urge the minister and the government to be considering the short, medium and long-term future of jetties right across the coastline of South Australia. I am very privileged to be the member for Flinders and to have over 2,000 kilometres of coastline. I am also very privileged to have 19 different jetties around that 2,000 kilometres of coastline, and each one of them is a central point for that community.

If you ever have the opportunity to go all the way out west to Point Sinclair, that is a focal point for that community, as is Fowlers Bay out in the far west and all the way around the west coast and down into the gulf waters. Obviously, those 20 jetties across the electorate of Flinders are priorities of mine, but there are over 70 jetties and marine infrastructure right around South Australia that are priorities for each and every one of those communities, and there needs to be strategic decision-making made. Not political games played, there needs to be strategic decision-making.

Obviously, the one that is front of mind for me and my community at the moment is the Tumby Bay jetty. It is a community that has continually called for action and, as I said, not just the political games. It needs real short, medium and long-term investment, but that is not the only one. The jetties where concerns are raised to me include Louth Bay, Denial Bay and Ceduna.

It has been encouraging to see some investment into the Streaky Bay jetty, which is one that does actually sustain a significant commercial fishing operation. For the last several years, they have not been able to use that jetty and they have had to have alternative arrangements in place. As I said, if we have not got the capacity to invest into the regional communities that put so much into our economy, then what are we doing as a state?

The Tumby Bay jetty, for instance, like many of the jetties around my coastline, is owned by the state government and it is leased to the council, and this lease is expiring soon. Whether it is the Tumby Bay jetty, the Port Neill jetty or one of the other several council-leased jetties around the coast of South Australia, they need works but they also need to have strategic decision-making put in place.

We need to have a full assessment of where that asset is at and then make clear non-political decisions about investment in the future. It is encouraging absolutely to see $5 million a year put into jetties by this government. Unfortunately, it is a drop in the ocean and there needs to be more funding made available to communities to put this in place and to take away the games.

This has been the issue where I have been frustrated. The member for West Torrens, the minister, and I butt heads on this one and he often tries to pop me in parliament, but I am reflecting what the community concerns are within my community; that is, if these vital pieces of marine infrastructure are lost now then they are lost for generations. They will not come back. They will not provide the opportunity for not just members of regional communities but our city cousins who often come to visit to go fishing, to go swimming, to go diving or to simply walk along and experience that marine environment.

This is not just about the small communities that these jetties are in, it is about the long-term future of South Australia and the coastal culture, which is such a significant part of who we are as a people. Councils and local communities have a role to play, absolutely, to partner with the state government, but it is time for the state government to step up and provide long-term solutions.

If you are asking communities of a couple of thousand people to put in several million dollars, the maths is just not working. They can't afford that. You cannot expect ratepayers of small communities—the District Council of Tumby Bay, the District Council of Ceduna, the District Council of Cleve—to be putting that significant money in without appropriate higher levels from the state government.

As the local member, I will keep making noise about this. I do not mind if there are personal pot shots at me in parliament; that happens all the time. We need to have a suitable solution for the jetties—and not just at Tumby Bay, which is front of mind because we have seen that play out publicly. We need to have this in place for regional communities, in particular all around our coastal communities, because we cannot afford to lose these vital pieces of community coastal infrastructure.

There is also a significant challenge being faced at the moment in my community and around South Australia when it comes to community safety. Every one of us as South Australians deserves to feel safe in our homes, on our streets, in our businesses and in our towns. Some of the alarming increases we have seen in offending—and those stats are really confronting—are in areas such as assaults, thefts, break-ins and other antisocial behaviours. They occur both here in the CBD in Adelaide, absolutely, but also in some of our regional centres, as we have seen recently in Port Augusta, Whyalla, Port Lincoln and Ceduna.

I have really deep concerns for the long-term resourcing of the police force in our state. I speak to so many not just around my electorate but around the state, and hear some of the stories about the struggles of the officers who are leaving the force. Recruits come in, but experienced officers are leaving at the back end. They are burnt out, they are frustrated with the system, and indeed the issue of recruitment and retention of police within our state is only exacerbated within regional parts, where I am hearing over and over that there is an ever-increasing need.

The stories that I am hearing from communities right around the state are frightening. As well as that, some of the anecdotes that I am hearing from police on the beat in these types of communities are equally as concerning, confronting and frightening. Our police are getting worn out, they are getting worn down, they are getting overburdened with work and they are actually starting to question their long-term career. If we are in a position where experienced police officers who have been in the force for a long time are questioning their long-term career, that is not a sustainable position at all.

Sadly, I have seen that within my region. I was speaking to an officer who has been in the force for decades who just got so sick of the system that he has moved. He has moved out of the state, that is how sick of it he was. At the same time as we are facing these challenges, we see that there are incentives in place interstate. Queensland, for instance, are offering significant incentives and financial supports to recruit police officers from both interstate and overseas.

We on this side have been calling for the government to release the findings from the Premier's Taskforce—once again, a big promise that was made in the lead-up to the last election. It is something which they said was necessary: a report that has been completed and a taskforce which finished its work months if not years ago, yet there is no sort of transparency when it comes to any report from that taskforce, and not just for us as decision-makers but for the police on the beat. To keep that Premier's Taskforce report secret is saying to police officers right around the state, 'You don't need to know this. We'll just keep this within our little circle, you don't need to know.' I think we are starting to see the police officers who are getting sick of that burden being carried solely by them.

The communities of South Australia, the communities within my electorate, are crying out for action from the government. They need to feel safe. We all deserve to feel safe within our own homes, and not just that but we need to have a system that actually holds offenders to account when they do the wrong thing.

I hear from so many police officers around the state and in my electorate who get frustrated with a system where they find an offender, catch an offender and hold them to account, but before you know it that offender is out on bail and offending again. We are starting to see these repeat offenders, and some of the extreme cases that the shadow police minister continues to highlight are truly worrying. It is affecting local communities.

Where is the strategy behind this? Where is the transparency? Where is the appropriate resourcing for police within our regional areas? Where is the strategy to help support police to stop them from leaving the force? We have seen just in recent days the recognition, the acknowledgement, from the police commissioner that perhaps the model that has been put in place is not working. He did say that, whatever model is in place, the resourcing to back that model up needs to be appropriate.

We on this side would welcome any transparency from the government when it comes to the Premier's Taskforce on police. We certainly welcome the review of the district policing model because this is something that we have been hearing from police officers right around Adelaide. They have concerns about that model with the current resourcing level. We need to have a minister—and I hope the Treasurer has time to be able to do so—who appropriately recognises those concerns and puts the resourcing in place to make sure we are backing up those who are tasked with keeping us safe.

It is some of the basics that we need to get right in our community that the government is responsible for. One that is obviously front of mind at the moment within regional communities in particular is the drought conditions that are being faced right across the state. This is one that is pretty close to home, because I am hearing every day from farmers who are on the edge of something catastrophic, who are frustrated with promises made but not delivered. There seems to be a theme here, a recurring theme.

Although noise gets made about a great party in Peterborough—'Peter goes to Peterborough, happy days, let's put on another party'—what we have actually seen delivered from the latest announcement about support for people experiencing drought conditions is that the help is not getting where it needs to get to. People right across my community in particular but also across the Mid North and Yorke Peninsula have been frustrated because the rhetoric does not reflect the reality. What we are hearing from government is not being delivered on the ground.

I hope that the meetings that have been had in recent days, whether it is today, yesterday—I am hearing about the system that is in place, for instance, to get donated hay into the paddocks of those farmers who are trying just to sustain their livestock. They are not trying to do anything exorbitant: they are just trying to keep their sheep and cattle alive until they get the feed in their paddocks that they need. This is a pretty significant extended period of dry. Last season was dry, absolutely. It shut off pretty early. There has not been any summer rain. The paddocks are bare.

The people are calling out for support from the government when they need it most, but what I am hearing from the services delivering that hay and from the farmers who are needing it is that there is no more hay. The procrastination from the government, the delaying of a decision to help pay for some of the transport costs, has actually meant that the hay that was available to be delivered to South Australian farmers has now gone. It has gone up to Queensland to flood-affected farmers. Farmers across South Australia cannot get the feed source that is needed to sustain their livestock.

In the media in just the last 24 hours we have seen the significant burden that is being carried by those regional communities, by those livestock owners, and the amount of livestock that has been sold in the last few months—and this is not just the regular sale of livestock when things get a bit tight. What I am hearing from farmers across my electorate and across South Australia is that they are selling the breeders. They are selling the years of genetics that they have invested in to have an ever-increasing capacity within their flock. Those breeders are being sold because the support has not been in place.

Looking forward, what we are hearing from those who are tasked with supplying that donated hay, firstly, is that a whole bunch of it is not available now because of the procrastination of government decision-making and, secondly, it is not going to be available for another month. Grass does not grow in a hurry, it only grows after a rain, and there is a significant delay. We have not had the rain. We have not even got to the point of germination of any sort of feed source.

When we have people who are making decisions about the long-term future of their livestock operation being told, 'No, it's over a month until you actually have the ability to access any of this feed,' you can see why some of them are getting pretty desperate. They are getting pretty desperate and that desperation, I fear, is leading to poor decisions and desperate acts.

I have spoken previously about my frustrations with the lack of understanding about how dire things are. It is all good for a bit of spin, all good for a Peter party, but when it is actually significantly hurting our regional communities they feel like they have been ignored. We have had announcements, whether it is an ESL refund or a registration refund, but when you dig into the detail of what it actually means and realise that very few farmers can actually access it, people see through that. People are sick of these sorts of platitudes that miss the reality of the situation. Our regional communities are really hurting, and what has been delivered by government has missed the mark by so far.

This Supply Bill is really about the continued operation of government for a period of time, and we reflect not just on the current financial year budget but also on what the budget might look like in the future. What a significant capital investment in my community looks like at the moment is what is being proposed for what is the most wicked problem on Eyre Peninsula and has been since settlement, and I am sure even before, and that is water on Eyre Peninsula.

The story often gets told that when Flinders came through and looked at the beautiful harbour—and if you have the opportunity to be on the water in the harbour at Boston Bay, you realise what a beautiful location it is and what potential is there, but the constraint has always been a water source and water supply. This is why, as the story goes, the capital of South Australia was not built at Port Lincoln: it was built over here in Adelaide.

My people on Eyre Peninsula have been frustrated because once again they feel like they have not been listened to by decision-makers, and this is especially pertinent when it comes to the proposal for a desalination plant at Billy Lights Point at Port Lincoln. For those who have not had the privilege of being on the water in Boston Bay, you may not know the intricate layout of the interaction between Proper Bay, Boston Bay and the gulf waters and the way they move around.

The proposal for a desalination plant within that bay area of Port Lincoln, from the very beginning when it was proposed, really was alarming not just for the aquaculture and fishing industries that rely on those waters but for the community as a whole who see the challenges that already exist within the environment there and the fine balance that there already is. They have a government that is continuing to push along with their proposal because it is the cheapest, because it is the easiest, but the concerns remain nonetheless. These are concerns, like I said, right across the community, right across the fishing and aquaculture industry, right across the Indigenous community, who have real concerns with that as a location.

What is the response from this government? Successive ministers, whether it was the minister for environment before or now the super minister, have said, 'Well, we don't think that you know what you are talking about, people of Eyre Peninsula. We are just going to do it anyway because it is the cheapest, because it is the easiest.'

As the detail of this proposal has worked its way through, I have spoken in this place a few times about my concerns with it. If this is going to be the location, at least try to get arrangements in place that minimise that concern and minimise that risk. It was only just a few weeks ago in a committee where we found out that where the wastewater treatment plant for Port Lincoln is, right nearby where the proposed location for a desal plant at Billy Lights Point is, there is only going to be several hundred metres between the outlet of the wastewater treatment plant and the intake of the desalination plant—something which my community did not know about until it was brought up through questioning in a committee.

It was the same with the outfall of the desal plant and the outfall of the wastewater plant. It is a concentrated area with slow or little movement of water in the bay area of Port Lincoln, which continues to be the concern for my community. At least, if you are going to put that desal plant in that location, consider an extension of the pipeline to get it out into some of that more swiftly moving water in the gulf. It does not move around much, but at least consider making that pipeline a few kilometres out. But, no, SA Water, in their wisdom, have continued to bore on straight ahead despite community concerns.

This is going to be the most significant capital infrastructure investment into Eyre Peninsula in history, comparative to some of the major works when it came to whether it was putting the Tod Reservoir or putting in place the rail line which went through the middle of Eyre Peninsula. This is going to be a significant capital investment—$330 million plus—and still the community's concerns about the arrangements have just been ignored. I will continue to bring up those concerns in this place in particular with the people who are tasked with making the decisions and getting those arrangements right; I will continue to be the advocate for my community.

The other aspect that is fascinating to watch at the moment, and frustrating for me, and the politics that have been inserted into that, is the Northern Water proposal. This is a significant potential project for the state—significant financially, absolutely—and what the effective project delivery would mean for the economic future of the whole of the state is significant.

The body of work that was put in to look at the preferred location at the time of Cape Hardy for the Northern Water project really did mean that the proposal had pretty widespread community support. It was in a location where there is deep water. It is reasonably active water for gulf waters, and there is not the same environmental concern. There is an existing Indigenous land use agreement in place and all the arrangements that had the support of the community, and it had a project team which was enthused about that.

Over the last six months, we have seen that obviously change. To have the responsibility for that now given to the Minister for Energy and Mining and for that project to now be considering an alternative location up at Mullaquana has meant that I have serious concerns about whether that project is actually going to be delivered and serious concerns about what the actual project cost is going to be. I think that whenever politics gets put into the decision-making for significant infrastructure projects like this, there is a risk of poorer outcomes for our community. This is exactly what I see happening at the moment.

Once again, politics gets paid, personal attacks happen—absolutely. You can see some of the back and forth that happens and the accusation that it is just me as a selfish local member wanting that project. No, I actually want the best outcome for the people of South Australia. I want there to be appropriate investment into infrastructure which enables economic activity for our state into the future and not just one which is made because of a political whim at the time because that is when lesser outcomes happen.

Within regional communities in particular, the challenge of housing is nuanced. There is a lot of discussion in this place and debate around the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan and where different locations are within that urban and peri-urban area, but there needs to be strategic decision-making when it comes to regional communities in particular. South Australia really is left behind when it comes to our cousins in the Eastern States, where we see that they have invested in regional communities, invested in regional cities that are now economically sustaining themselves, communities which have 50,000, 60,000, 100,000 people.

We talk about our regional centres. When our second biggest town is a 25,000-person one, this is why interstate the population centres of that size are called towns because they have real regional cities. We need strategic decision-making because regional South Australia has the potential to be the economic driver even more so than it is now, but that investment needs to happen strategically, and it starts with some of the strategic decision-making around regional housing in particular.

One aspect which I do not think is fully understood, fully grasped, by decision-makers, especially those from metropolitan areas, is the impact that the native vegetation laws are having on constricting and restricting the potential residential and industrial growth for our regional centres. The Native Vegetation Act is in place, but it does not pertain to metropolitan Adelaide; it is for areas outside. We hear about the obligation and the cost burden that is borne by regional communities, regional councils, regional investors and developers, because of this piece of legislation, even within the confines of a township boundary.

With strategic decision-making, if we are actually being proactive about the future of our state, these are the sorts of levers that should be considered by decision-makers when it comes to enabling communities, putting real incentives in place and reflecting not just the economic activity that is already put into the state but also the potential for it. This is why I have long been an advocate for specific regional policy which can be put in place to enable those communities. In regional areas we need to get the basics right. We need to set the foundation for our communities, and it starts with education, it starts with health care, and we need to get some of the aspects right such as child care in regional centres.

I certainly welcome the federal Liberal opposition putting forward a commitment, if they are elected, to put significant investment into regional child care in particular. This is an aspect which is a handbrake on the economy of regional South Australia and regional Australia. If we do not get the basics right, we are going to miss the opportunity and let our communities down. There are so many different aspects to what we are putting forward as a Liberal opposition that I think, as we lead up to the next state election, we will have people reflecting on, 'Were the promises that were made to me at the last election kept?' We have seen the promises that I have highlighted today, where this government, despite the rhetoric, has let the community of South Australia down. This is why, in the lead-up to the next state election, as we go through the next state budget, I think there will be a lot of questions for this government to answer about why those promises to the people of South Australia have not been kept.

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (17:24): I rise today in support of the Supply Bill 2025. This bill brought forward by the Malinauskas Labor government is not simply a financial mechanism to keep the machinery of government running, it is a living expression of our priorities, our values and our promise to the people of South Australia.

It is easy in discussions of budgets and bills to focus on numbers, appropriations and percentages, but what these figures truly represent are people—individuals, families and communities—who rely on us as elected representatives to make decisions that uplift lives, enable opportunity and build a fairer society. This bill continues that mission. It funds the services that matter, supports the economy we are building for the future and takes real steps to address the challenges facing everyday South Australians, from housing and infrastructure to jobs and climate resilience.

I will begin with one of the most fundamental pillars of any society, economic opportunity. The Supply Bill 2025 represents a continuation of the Malinauskas Labor government's proactive approach to economic growth and job creation. We understand that a thriving economy does not happen by chance: it is built through vision, investment and strategic reform.

Take, for instance, the State Development Coordination and Facilitation Bill 2025. This is not just legislative reform, it is a long-overdue shift in how we coordinate development across our state. By streamlining outdated and often duplicative approval processes, we are unlocking opportunities faster. For decades, South Australia has had world-class standards when it comes to planning and development but, too often, the road to realising those projects has been blocked by red tape. We are cutting through that without compromising on quality, safety or environmental stewardship. That is smart reform, the kind that attracts business, encourages investment and creates jobs.

When we talk about industry, we cannot overlook the critical situation at the Whyalla Steelworks. The decision to step in, to appoint administrators and work to secure a future for the site, was not one made lightly, but it was one made with resolve. Steelmaking is not just a part of our industrial history, it is part of our industrial future. Whyalla matters. It matters for the thousands of families whose livelihoods depend on the site. It matters for our construction sector, for our renewable energy projects and for our state's economic independence.

By acting swiftly and decisively, we have demonstrated what responsible government looks like, intervening to stabilise a vital economic asset while seeking a sustainable, long-term solution that secures jobs and encourages reinvestment in regional South Australia.

Of course, economic growth must go hand in hand with tackling the immediate pressures people face in their daily lives, and chief among those is housing. Across Australia, we are facing a housing affordability crisis driven by rapid population growth, high construction costs and insufficient supply. South Australia is not immune to these pressures, but we are taking clear and confident steps to address them.

The Supply Bill 2025 funds vital initiatives to unlock more land, streamline development approvals and invest in the infrastructure that makes housing viable. Through amendments to the environment and food production areas, we are responsibly expanding the land available for housing, making space for over 61,000 new dwellings. This is not about reckless sprawl or unchecked development: it is about balance. We are ensuring that South Australians, especially young people and families, can find an affordable home in a connected, liveable community.

Again, the State Development Coordination and Facilitation Bill 2025 plays a crucial role here. By establishing designated state development areas, we are setting the stage for fast-tracked projects that already meet our environmental and planning standards. This cuts delays, attracts builders and accelerates construction at a time when we need it most. We are also investing in the essential infrastructure—roads, water and sewerage—that unlocks the potential of these developments and connects people to opportunity. This is not just a housing policy, it is an opportunity policy.

We must also speak plainly about the financial pressures facing South Australian households. The rising cost of groceries, energy, rent and fuel is squeezing budgets across the state. These are not abstract statistics; they are real stresses that keep families up at night. That is why I welcome the significant $266.2 million cost-of-living relief package announced in the 2024-25 state budget. This includes a one-off additional Cost of Living Concession payment of over $243.90 to over 210,000 eligible households, payments that have already flowed into homes where they are needed most. For some, that money might mean keeping the heater on longer over winter. For others, it is more groceries in the fridge, or covering the cost of school uniforms. Mr Speaker, I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.


At 17:31 the house adjourned until Wednesday 30 April 2025 at 10:30.

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