HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-06-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

SUPPLY BILL 2008

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 6 May 2008. Page 2702.)

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (16:53): I rise to speak in relation to the Supply Bill this year (I am the first to do so) and, naturally, we support it, but I will make some comments in relation to the past 12 months and the public sector, etc. It will not be a particularly long contribution because, as members are aware, we spent all last sitting week on WorkCover, to which I think everyone was happy to commit that time, but now, of course, we have quite a large agenda of government business, so I will not speak for terribly long.

Of course, we have this bill every year. It funds the public sector prior to the budget bill being adopted and, obviously, we support it. This bill provides for about $2.3 billion to be available before the budget is adopted. it is an incredible amount of money, and it is over a quarter and less than a third of the total budgeted income when this government took office.

Given that the bill supports public servants throughout this building, I think it is appropriate to comment on the ballooning number of ministerial staff employed by the current Labor government. The increase across the ministerial pool has been almost 100 extra staff since the government came to office. We have 15 ministers, so that is about six extra staff members in each minister's office. Given that they have been in office for six years, that is one a year and, if it continues at that rate, we will have another 30 or 40 ministerial staff by the next election and, God forbid, if we do not win the next election, there will be another 100 before the next election. So, it gives an indication that, even in their own offices, they cannot manage their staff.

It is interesting to look at it in terms of the total number of public servants. The Commissioner for Public Employment has recently looked at this and announced that the public sector has increased by 17,017 employees since this government came to office. I know that the government always talks about doctors, teachers and police, and the opposition has always supported that—in fact, we have called for more police, and I will touch on the police numbers in a little while—but it is hard to believe that we have 17,017 extra full-time equivalent positions in six years. That is nearly 3,000 a year, or 60 positions a week being created and filled.

As I said, we support the appointment of anyone who gives us quality of life, a safer life and better health care, although it is interesting that today perhaps 6,000 to 10,000 people demonstrated out the front of the building about a pay claim for the teachers. If the Public Service numbers had not been allowed to balloon out of control, the government might be in a better position to meet some of the demands of the teachers—and, of course, the doctors, who have just recently resigned. Today, as I said, there were 6,000 to 10,000 public sector teachers out the front of this place demonstrating. Of course, the impact of that is that 165,000 public school students are at home impacting on their parents, some having to take days off and some having to take sick leave or parenting leave or probably, I suspect, leave without pay. There are 165,000 kids not at school because this government has not managed its public sector employment.

The Advertiser today stated that the strike was futile because the government does not have the money to meet the demands, yet we hear that these are the best economic times the state has been in. We have seen revenue grow significantly over the life of this government. We know there was particularly good financial management of the national accounts by the former Liberal government. We are in the best of times; yet, again, we see an example of this government having squandered its opportunities, and now South Australia is not in a position to make the most of the buoyant economic times.

The government has a notion of a Public Service cap which, according to the Treasurer, means that government agencies are not authorised to increase their employment without cabinet approval, so the Treasurer is saying that cabinet has to approve these increases. So, the 15 members of this government who have sat around the cabinet table have allowed the public sector to grow by 17,000 extra positions over the past six years. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how they could allow that to happen, but I guess it is a little like the sort of management we have seen of WorkCover.

Six years ago there was a $60 million unfunded liability. I know that members opposite would say that the actuary uses a different accounting method now so it really should have been at $120 million, not $60 million, when we started. So, even if we accept that it should have been $120 million, it has gone from $120 million to almost $1 billion. When I questioned the minister, the chair of the board and the CEO, the CEO's response was, 'No-one saw it happening; no-one saw it coming.' Now we have a government that sits around the cabinet table and, according to the Commissioner for Public Employment (so it is not an opposition figure or a government figure: it is a figure from the independent Commissioner), we have 17,000 extra public servants, and they have sat around the cabinet table and approved every one of them.

The Hon. P. Holloway interjecting:

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: The minister said 'doctors and nurses'. It is not doctors and nurses, nor is it police. I will touch on police numbers. This government's policy is to have 4,400 police officers on the beat by 2010. If we are talking about full-time equivalents (which is what the Commissioner for Public Employment figures are), on 30 June last year there were 3,842 full-time equivalent police officer positions in South Australia, which was a decrease from the previous 30 June figure. So, while the Public Service has grown by 17,000 full-time equivalents over the past six years, in the past 12 months we have seen a decrease in police numbers.

I am looking forward to the minister's first dorothy dixer when parliament resumes next year, because every February the Hon. Bernard Finnigan rolls out the Productivity Commission Dorothy Dix question. It will be interesting to see where the full-time equivalents have gone and whether the government has any prospect at all of meeting its commitment of recruiting 400 new officers and having 4,400 on the beat (to quote the minister) by 2010.

I know that this is the Supply Bill, and I will not mention the budget, apart from saying that I note in the budget papers that the recruit 400 program has been extended by at least two years. I suspect it is an admission that the government will fail to reach its target by 2010. There was also the recent announcement by the Police Commissioner with respect to tasers—and I congratulate my colleague and recently re-endorsed member of the Legislative Council team, the Hon. Terry Stephens, for his longstanding hard work, his sort of crusade, to have South Australian police officers equipped with tasers.

It was interesting that the Sunday Mail did a feature on tasers, because the police wanted tasers and had been asking for them for some time, with the support of the Police Association. The people who sell tasers often come through town, and they met with me to have a quick chat. Then the Sunday Mail contacted me. The opposition saw that as an opportunity—and probably a political opportunity—to release our policy for providing the Commissioner with funding for 500 taser units to deploy across the police force as he saw fit. So, we provided that policy to the Sunday Mail to match up with its thrust for tasers and then, lo and behold, the Commissioner came out with it. I suspect that the minister was not even aware that the Commissioner was going to announce the fact that they were to have a broad trial.

It is interesting that the number of public servants has grown almost exponentially, yet the government has to be dragged screaming and kicking to give public servants more resources so they can do their jobs properly. As has been mentioned previously, the police officers in this state do not even receive a kit bag, a raincoat or any wet weather gear when they graduate. The Hon. Paul Holloway laughs and shakes his head, but I do not know whether I would want to put on a wet raincoat—

The Hon. P. Holloway interjecting:

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: The minister is laughing about not receiving a kit bag. I am told that when officers go on duty they have their morning meeting and there is no standard piece of equipment in which they can carry their gear. Some of the gear, such as their weapons, handcuffs, radios, and so on, are locked in the station but there is nothing in which to carry all the other gear, such as notebooks, torches, and so on. They do not provide them with the basic equipment. It is quite bizarre that this government is happy to almost take its eye off the ball. I will bet its excuse for the 17,000 extra public servants will be that no-one saw it coming. The Treasurer said, 'The government has announced a public servant cap', which, according to the Treasurer, means that government agencies are not authorised to increase employment without cabinet approval. So, clearly, this is a very lazy government.

I will quickly touch on the PACE program, which the government talks about as its great success, in achieving over $300 million worth of exploration drilling in this state. Certainly, there is a world record amount of exploration taking place. What the government has failed to mention is where the price of commodities has gone over the past six years. I will bet that if uranium was down at the price it was before or if oil was down at $30 a barrel or if gold was down at $200 an ounce there would be no exploration, no matter how much money they put out.

It is about time that the government talked about the PACE program in the context of the burgeoning commodity prices and world demand. If there was no demand—if the economies of China and India were not booming—we would have no exploration at all. When one looks at the budget papers, one will see that the PACE program puts about 1 per cent of the roughly $3 million a year into a $330 million or $340 million a year program.

No company in the world that I know of makes a decision based on a 1 per cent kick-up from the government to go and find 99 per cent. It is being driven purely by a 30-year commitment from governments of all persuasions to put the right data in place. We have some of the best data (which I think began when Frank Blevins was the minister), and it was vigorously pursued by the Liberal government. We had a program called TEISA, which the government says was not funded. That is because it chose not to fund it in its first budget, so it ran out of funding. Then the next year it launched the same thing and called it something different and claimed the whole massive exploration boom on its program. This government is dreaming if it thinks $3 million will deliver $340 million worth of exploration.

Interestingly, as I have mentioned before in this place, when Dr Paul Vogel left the EPA he made some comments in relation to compliance officers and radiation officers. If we have 40 per cent of the world's known uranium in South Australia (and we are likely to find more, so we could say at least 40 per cent), we are not seeing any commitment with respect to the 17,000 public servants to support and back up our industries.

I note that there has been some commitment in the current budget for extra staff in PIRSA to support the mining industry, yet there has been no overall allocation to PIRSA. So, I suspect that there will be a shifting of the deckchairs. Some other needy parts of our rural industries will have staff ripped off them, so they will flounder in supporting this other industry, yet the Premier and the minister are out there all the time bragging about this great resources boom.

I refer to a magazine called Paydirt, in which there is a photograph of the Premier. The article is headed, 'It is not a boom: it is a way of life in South Australia'. There is also a lovely photograph of the minister and his adviser on the next page—in fact, I think she looks much better than the minister in the photograph! We have not seen any commitment over the past 12 months to support that way of life; that is, it is not a boom—it is a way of life. Where is the commitment from this government to support those industries that are booming to capture some of this wealth? With those few words, I indicate that I and the opposition are supporting the Supply Bill. In the interests of getting some government business completed this week without having to sit until 3, 4 or 5 in the morning, I will conclude my remarks.

The Hon. C.V. SCHAEFER (17:08): When I say that I will make a short speech, I will actually make a short speech. The purpose of the Supply Bill is to provide essential funding to the government so that it can pay the bills between now and the declaration of the new budget. It must be passed by the end of this week, as I understand it, so, of course, we will be supporting it. When I say 'pay the bills', that includes the wages of the Public Service—and what a large bill that has become. As my colleague has rightly pointed out, this government has increased the Public Service by 17,500 people in its time. Members would think that, with an extra 17,500 people, some of the demands being made by an increasingly desperate police force, an increasingly desperate education group (our teachers) and increasingly desperate salaried medical officers would be met.

For instance, members would think that, as a result of the extra 17,500 people, we would have smaller class sizes in schools or more policemen on the beat. Members would think that (even though this government does not know where it is) we would be able to have a policeman at places such as Coober Pedy 24 hours a day. Members would think they would be able to achieve that with 17,500 extra public servants but, no, they do not have any of those things. Members would think that, with 17,500 additional public servants, there would be some nurses in emergency—

The Hon. R.P. Wortley interjecting:

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Hon. I.K. Hunter): Order! The Hon. Ms Schaefer will be heard in silence.

The Hon. C.V. SCHAEFER: The Hon. Mr Russell Wortley interjects that I will be missed. Believe me, he won't be. We have 17,500 additional public servants, yet we do not see any additional services in this entire state. This is the highest taxing government in this state's history. In order to pay the bills and to perform what I believe is a pea and thimble trick, it will close country hospitals, some 45 country hospitals—just a few. There will now be medical services at Port Augusta, but you better not have an accident or take sick if you happen to be travelling on Highway One between Port Augusta and Ceduna because there will not be anyone to assist you.

This leads me to some of the increased charges we have in this budget and the reason why we are now having to pass this bill. When I was driving somewhere the other day, I heard the Treasurer talking about how this year fees and charges were not increasing much: they were only increasing an average of 2.5 per cent in line with CPI. That needs to be taken into context with last year's staggering rises, some up to 175 per cent.

I just happen to have kept a news clipping from last year outlining some of the rises from last year: car registration fee from $82 to $88; a six cylinder vehicle from $176 to $186; speeding fines from $169 to $176; and so the list goes on. We need to put that into context when we look at this year's fees, which were gazetted on budget day. For example, an emergency callout fee (ambulance services) will rise from $688 to $712; an emergency two callout fee will go from $496 to $513; and a non-emergency fee from $153 to $158. In spite of saying that it is doing good things for us, it continues to slug the people of South Australia.

In relation to police service fees and charges, last year an aircraft callout cost $1,347 per hour: it will now cost $1,394 per hour. Another example is disability services fees: disability, campus-base fee from $256 to $265; disability, other campus-base services fee for in-patient or residential accommodation from $369 to $382; and Disability South Australia fee for preparation of a report from $298 to $308. I cannot find anything that has not increased in the past 12 months. I would not mind that if I could see any improved services but, no, we have our teachers and our salaried medical officers striking, our anaesthetists resigning and our country health services in chaos. We do not have any more public servants that anyone in the street can see or find, and yet we have 17,500 of them stuck away somewhere.

The Leader of the Opposition smiles, because many of them are tucked away in the Premier's offices. He has the highest number of staffers that any premier in the state has ever had in line with the highest fees, charges and taxes of any government that this state has ever had.

It gives me no real pleasure to support a bill which provides more of the fat to more of the public servants who do less of the work on the ground. However, as I said, it is our job to support this so that those people who are out there working hard for the services and fees of this state will be paid. I support the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.

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