HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-07-16 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

APPROPRIATION BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 14 July 2009. Page 2842.)

The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (16:16): In supporting the passage of this bill, I recognise its importance in providing finance to the various programs incorporated in the 2009-10 budget. It is my intention to focus on some particular areas that relate to my responsibilities for the opposition, particularly in regard to the budget presented early last month.

The initial area I want to talk about is in relation to the northern suburbs and areas adjacent to the northern suburbs which, for the purposes of the government's new portfolio, have been put into that area—even though they were not asked about it. Particularly, I commence by indicating community concerns and my own concerns about the ongoing situation at the Modbury Hospital. In the Appropriation Bill debate in this council on 31 July 2007 I said as follows:

While on the health sector, I have to say that I am disturbed by the manner in which this budget has treated Modbury Hospital. Shortly after paying dearly to return it to government management, the decision to remove the paediatric and birthing services at Modbury defied description. Despite a partial backflip on the paediatric services, the situation remains that more than 600 women annually will be forced to go to the Lyell McEwin Hospital, or somewhere else, to have their babies.

That is what I said almost two years ago. It is unfortunate that the situation at Modbury has continued to deteriorate in the time since.

We have learnt, increasingly, that the Rann government wants to strip back suburban hospitals in favour of a hospital at the rail yards, which will not be built for years and will swallow just about all of the health budget. The Liberal Party wants to continue to deliver critical acute services close to where people live and, in saying that, we definitely want to keep services operating at Modbury Hospital that the government continues to strip away.

The other matter is that not only will the government's plans for suburban hospitals lower the standard of care for patients but also they will reduce opportunities for our future medical workforce to train in local communities. Cutbacks on the ability of people to access Modbury means not only added pressure on Lyell McEwin Hospital from that direction but we also have the current situation where the federal Labor government has done the opposite to the state Labor government and decided to put Gawler into the inner metropolitan area whereas, to its credit, this state government has classified Gawler as country for just about everything. So, we now have a situation in Gawler where the very successful GP Inc arrangement for emergency and after hours consultations at the Gawler Health Service will be closed down by the federal government.

It is crazy; and the federal government is doing this only because it was a very good initiative of the Howard Liberal government. However, it means that in emergency and after hours situations more and more people will head to the Lyell McEwin Hospital. So there is this added pressure of people from Modbury, where Modbury has been laid bare. It is a great shame, and I know that many people in the north-eastern suburbs are concerned about what can actually be done at that excellent facility, which has been stripped. I think all the Gawler changes do is add to the huge pressure on the Lyell McEwin Hospital.

We know that they are in the process of building a car park at Lyell McEwin, and it is badly needed. If you have ever tried to get a car park around that hospital you will know that the streets are congested; local residents find it very difficult to get a car park there as well. Mr Acting President, you and I were both on the Elizabeth Vale school select committee, and I remember the issues in relation to parking in the vicinity of the Lyell McEwin at the time.

During the remainder of my speech I will ask a few questions to which I would like some answers. I do not necessarily expect them before we conclude this debate tomorrow, but I would appreciate it if the answers could be provided in writing in the near future. The first relates to the Northern Connections Office. The director of that office is Dr Mal Hemmerling and there seems to be some confusion about his role. The opposition was told in estimates that he would start in a full-time capacity in August, but apparently the director has referred to himself as the 'acting director'. If he is the acting director will the position be advertised, as was the case recently with the Director of the Office of the Southern Suburbs?

I would also be interested in receiving some detail of the work that has been carried out by the Northern Connections Office staff: first, since the first officer took up a role in the minister's office in August 2008, as indicated by the minister in estimates; and, secondly, since the office opened at Philip Highway, Elizabeth, on 17 April this year. I am also keen to know what action will be taken to ensure that the office works for the benefit of all the areas covered by the five councils that were allocated to this portfolio's geography by the minister when she was appointed. I would like to make it clear that I believe this office has a role in advocating for the townships within that area.

My colleague the member for Goyder, now Deputy Leader of the Opposition, asked some very good questions on my behalf, one being about the townships largely within the Playford council area and one within the Salisbury area, but the minister did not seem to realise that those townships were actually within the boundaries of the area that she designated for the northern suburbs portfolio, so that was a concern. I would be interested to know more about what work will be done with the communities of One Tree Hill, Virginia and Angle Vale, which are all situated within the Playford council, and St Kilda, which is within the Salisbury council area.

I turn to the area of regional development. The regional development budget statement has a section on page 3, where it goes into some detail about the new Regional Development Australia arrangements which were due to come into full effect on 1 July this year. Certainly a transition process is underway. We know that the federal government's former ACCs (Area Consultative Committees) have been closed down, some of them for some time. I refer to a paragraph on page 3 of the statement, which states:

There will be no loss of service locations under the new arrangements. All locations covered by the current arrangements will continue to have a service presence under the RDA network and the state government will continue to provide substantial funding to the state's regional development organisations.

I will go into this in more detail, but I am concerned that funding levels remain. We have seen since the Regional Department Australia proposals were supposedly locked in by the federal government that they dropped their commitment in the 2009 federal budget by almost $250,000. I will come to that later.

In the changes that we see where the regional development board network has been brought together with the ACCs and into largely the same boundaries as the state government's new common regions, we have a situation where the former northern regional development board is almost exactly the same as the new RDA for the Far North. There is a similar situation on the Limestone Coast, where there was the one regional development board that had the same boundaries as the old area consultative committee. However, in the remaining regions there are more complex situations, and I will go through them.

We have a situation where the new Eyre and Western RDA will be made up of the former regional development boards of Whyalla and Eyre. I know the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association and its constituent councils and other stakeholders have been concerned about how these two boards will work under the one umbrella, given the significant differences between the core interests and issues of Eyre Peninsula as against the industrial city of Whyalla. A similar case exists in relation to the Riverland Development Corporation and the Murraylands regional development board, which will come together in this new Murray Mallee or Murraylands/Riverland Regional Development Australia Board.

In both cases, I understand that the transition arrangements are trying to accommodate the wishes of those four boards, that they retain their identities and their independence, even if they have an umbrella board over the top of the two pairings. I understand that there will be more discussion in the near future with the Office of Regional Affairs and the Department of Trade and Economic Development about the way that works. I am very keen that the identities of those bodies remain as has been promised in relation to shopfront and leadership with the board, the chief executive and other staff.

We also have a situation where the Yorke, the Southern Flinders Ranges and the Mid North regional development boards have all been brought together to form the new regional development Australia organisation known as Yorke and Mid North. However, the District Council of Mallala has been taken away from the Yorke board, and I will mention that a little later.

I have some connection with that, because some years ago, I think when the Liberal Party was in government, the Mallala council had not been able to be involved in a regional development board, and it came to the then minister, the Hon. Rob Kerin, and myself, and we managed to assist the council to join the Yorke board. It has been a successful marriage. The current chair of the Yorke board, Mr Ian O'Loan, is from the Mallala area and is the current chairman of the Regional Development South Australia peak body.

So, we have a situation where there are three boards, three CEOs and three shopfronts. We have been told that they will remain. How we deal with the three CEOs is something that I suppose the new boards need to work out.

We have a similar situation where the Kangaroo Island, Adelaide Hills and Fleurieu regional development boards will be brought together. This is a combination of two of the government's regions in one but, here again, we have similar issues to the previous three board amalgamations.

We then move to what has been known as the Barossa and Light Development Board, which had previously incorporated the Barossa Council and the Light Regional Council. That is now having Mallala added to it, and also the town of Gawler. This is an interesting situation, because the town of Gawler has never been in a regional development board before and has been covered by the Northern Adelaide Business Enterprise Centre for a number of government delivery services. I am sure that the town of Gawler will pay for its involvement in only one of those organisations, not both, so that is something that will need to be sorted out.

I think the negotiations are continuing, but it just shows that the people—in both the state and federal governments—who thought this was all going to be rolled in and finished by 1 July (which is now 15 days ago) are living in fairyland.

As the current opposition spokesman for regional development—and I do not know whether that will continue, but I hope it does—I will continue to monitor all these arrangements in the long term. I do not want there to be a situation where all these different boards have in good faith accepted the arrangements with a long-term view, only to be told after it has all settled down, 'Sorry, we're now going to close the shopfronts and we're going to reduce the number of staff and do other things.'

I am concerned about that. I think the new boards will have a role to play in this. I note the number of advertisements in the metropolitan and country press in relation to expressions of interest for members of Regional Development Australia boards. I echo some of the thoughts, expressed some months ago, of very good local government people: that it is vital that these boards retain the local board ownership and that the people who run these boards live locally and have the integrity to make them function as well as the regional development boards have in the past.

As part of Regional Development Australia, the whole of Adelaide has been allocated to one region, as it was with the area consultative committee. I think the prospects for that body are in doubt, because, when we queried the government and its federal counterparts about the almost $250,000 shortfall and what was offered as part of this Regional Development Australia proposal, we were told, 'Well, the $244,000 was going to go to the Adelaide RDA, but that'll only be operating in a very informal sense, so that money will be distributed out among the regions.' I do not know what that means, whether it means that the stakeholders in the Adelaide metropolitan RDA have not been satisfied that this is a deal with which they want to be involved, but I think time will tell.

Moving on, we know that for some time the state government has not seen fit to give regional development boards more than $65,000 per annum in total for business advisers, and that the boards have had to top this up from other funds. I think pressure needs to be applied to provide more resources for business advisers, given that the previous business advisory positions that resided in the old area consultative committees have ceased to exist. So, there are fewer business advisory positions out there in each region.

I would also appreciate some advice, by way of written response, in relation to the future of the six Department of Trade and Economic Development regional managers. They had a focus role in the regionalisation of the Strategic Plan. That has been completed, and I am interested to know what is the future of those positions.

In relation to the Regional Development Infrastructure Fund, which is mentioned in the budget papers several times, it is interesting that the $3 million budgeted by the government has again been underspent. This is in stark contrast to the fact that a Liberal government will deliver $7 million a year to the Regional Development Infrastructure Fund, a fund which was established by a Liberal government and which has been proven to seed much greater investment in regional areas.

I will conclude very shortly. I just want to mention a couple of other matters that relate to work done by government bodies and officials, involving areas in which I have a particular interest. First, I would like to talk briefly about the issue of surrogacy. We have been talking this afternoon in this council about reproductive technology, and in my speech I mentioned the surrogacy bill. I would like to highlight the fact that I first introduced a bill into this place in June 2006. It was referred to the Social Development Committee, with my acceptance, in September 2006, and that committee brought down a report in November 2007.

In response to that report I introduced a second bill in February 2008, and I am proud to say that, after some very good debate in this chamber, it passed on the voices in June 2008. It is now July 2009, the House of Assembly has its last sitting day today, and I understand that it will not be debated again. There has been limited debate, but it will not be debated further or go to a vote until at least 24 September. I hope that is when this bill will be dealt with.

It is a conscience matter. I appreciate the way in which it has been dealt with in this chamber, but it has been stalled in the House of Assembly. The Standing Committee of Attorneys-General agreed, probably almost two years ago, that every jurisdiction in this country would develop uniform legislation towards legalising surrogacy, particularly relating to the surrogacy that I have advocated where no money changes hands and it is very tightly held within families.

The Attorney-General in this state has done nothing about it. He has made it quite clear that he is against surrogacy, so he has gone against the standing committee. It has been left in the hands of the Minister for Health and his office to deal with my bill in the absence of a government bill. I have worked closely with minister Hill's office on the suggested amendments that they have made. I have accepted all but one of those amendments. The bill is being handled by the member for Morphett (Dr McFetridge) in another place, and I look forward to it being progressed when we come back in September.

The other issue that I have had a lot to do with is suicide prevention, particularly the community response to eliminating suicide. The former minister for mental health, who is in the chamber, was not keen on the CORES program, but, when the new minister (Hon. Jane Lomax-Smith) came in about 12 months ago, I had some discussions with her and with Monsignor Cappo about the possibility of the government supporting the CORES program. I was told that it would be considered as a part of the government review of mental health, particularly suicide prevention practices, but unfortunately there has been no response.

The issue of suicide has not gone away. This issue, while it is very evident in country areas, is even more so (these days) in suburban areas, and it is something that we need to do more about. This program uses everyday people from all walks of life in the community. I urge the government to do something in this area. I commend the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association for committing some $11,000 towards running a program in that part of the state. Certainly, action is needed, and it needs to be community based. I commend the CORES program to the government for its further consideration.

In conclusion, I am grateful that this debate has given me the opportunity to note the funds appropriated in the budget to various agencies and to raise particular issues regarding the regional development and northern suburbs portfolios, and other important areas.

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS (16:45): I rise to speak on Premier Rann's eighth Labor budget; the budget that will define this government going into the state election in March 2010, as it argues the case for a third term. It is a budget from a tired and arrogant government which has spent eight years doing next to nothing and is now trying to promise and borrow its way into a third term.

This is a budget which, in a remarkable move, contains a promised $750 million in expenditure cuts which will be offloaded to an external razor gang whose recommendations will not be known until after the election. This budget makes none of the hard decisions it is supposed to make. The $750 million in savings, made either through tax increases or cuts to jobs in the public sector—and you can be sure there will be many—are on the way, but we will not be told what those cuts will be until after the state election.

Members of the opposition are stunned by this move, and the South Australian public should be, too. How can members opposite defend the Treasurer on this one? It is truly bizarre, and it is a decision that can only have been made in an attempt to avoid public scrutiny. As some of my Liberal colleagues have already stated, we do hope the Public Service Association is paying very close attention. We hope it is watching, because it is very clear what the Rann government is up to. It is a massive con. There is $750 million in savings, but 'We will tell you all about it on the day after the election.' It is quite unbelievable.

I will move on to state taxation. Small businesses, hoping to grow and employ more people, have had those hopes dashed by record levels of land tax, payroll tax and WorkCover levies. It is highly regrettable that we are recognised around the nation as being the highest-taxing state in Australia. It is official: under the Rann Labor government, South Australia is the highest-taxing state in the country. Total state taxation revenue in 2009-10 will be $48 million higher than in 2008-09.

Tax revenue has steadily increased by 61 per cent since this government came to office. We should be used to it by now. Labor governments, whether they be federal or state, are high-taxing, high-spending governments. We saw the Whitlam years, the Hawke and Keating years with high taxing and high spending, and now Rann and Foley—unbelievable!

Increases on property taxes, such as land tax, have been incredibly disappointing. We have seen an increase since the 2001-02 budget from $731 million to $1.428 billion. I have talked to business people and constituents about land tax. They are having to sell properties and their business interests here in South Australia and move interstate where the land tax regime is fair and reasonable. South Australia's restrictive taxation regime is doing nothing to encourage small business growth in South Australia and, in fact, it is causing small businesses to move interstate.

Earlier in the year in this place I said that I recalled hearing the Treasurer speak on radio responding to a caller who complained that his land tax bill had increased from $15,000 to $58,000 in one year. The Treasurer stated:

Well, firstly, I'd be more than happy, if the listener has a complaint, to write to us and we will look at it. But he is saying his bill has gone from $15,000 to $58,000. Two things have occurred: it's either a factor of property value increases and, bearing in mind in South Australia we have a shortage of industrial property and it may well be in fact that he has received a significant increase in the capital value of his land which is a benefit to both him and to his business.

As I said at the time, I could not believe my ears when listening to the Treasurer. The Treasurer has no understanding that, as the capital value of property increases, it does nothing to affect the actual cash flow of a business or an individual or provide any extra capacity to pay these unfair land tax bills. It just demonstrates how out of touch the Rann government is.

I will now touch briefly on the current situation with WorkCover. As a member of the Statutory Authorities Review Committee, I have had several opportunities to hear directly from representatives from WorkCover. It is always a sobering experience. It is always in a forum open to both the public and the media.

WorkCover's unfunded liability has blown out from $56 million in 2001 to $1.3 billion in 2009, and that does not include the public sector unfunded liability; if that were added, there would be an increase of almost another $500 million. It represents bad news for the South Australian taxpayer. Let us not forget that this government promised reduced WorkCover levies—another promise this government has failed to deliver on.

Looking at this budget's fiscal position and outlook—in particular, deficits—we can see in the 2009-10 budget that there are budget deficits on all three accounting measures: the first is a net lending deficit of $1.541 billion this year, a cash deficit of $1.540 billion this year and a net operating deficit of $304 million in this budget year.

The state's 2008-09 and 2009-10 revenue has strengthened by $130 million and $722 million respectively since the 2008-09 budget, mainly due to bailouts by the federal Labor government. The Rann Labor government has been telling the public that there are huge budget black holes; however, revenue has increased by massive amounts. The Liberal opposition maintains that the government has not really had an issue with revenue. We have had seven years of incredible revenue thanks to the GST revenue from the federal Liberal government—a measure opposed by Labor on all fronts.

However, the Treasurer continues to underestimate revenue collections every year. From 2002-03 to 2008-09, the government will have collected a massive $3.8 billion more than it expected. These revenue windfalls are masking unbudgeted increases in expenses, which have been highlighted by the Auditor-General. Part C, page 6 of the 2007-08 Auditor-General's Report states, 'The state has received very large amounts of unbudgeted revenues.'

It has never been about revenue problems for this government: it has an expenses problem. Anyone who knows a little bit about managing a business—and, unlike most government MPs, we on this side do know something about it—knows that managing the state's economy employs the same principles. In business, you must control your expenses. If your expenses are blowing out, your profit is obviously affected and you will run at a loss. This government is not managing expenses efficiently, and we have run into a loss and deficit position for this year and the next.

The government also fails to deliver on its promises. It makes policy on the run. We were promised a Mount Bold Reservoir expansion but, in the next budget, it had vanished. Where is the money? It is nowhere to be seen. Members will recall the Upper Spencer Gulf desalination plant promised in the 2007-08 budget; it is no longer going ahead. We had tramlines to West Lakes, Port Adelaide and Semaphore promised last year; the money for that project is nowhere to be seen in this year's budget. We were promised an underpass along South Road between Port Road and Grange Road. Where is the money for that in this latest state budget?

Last year, the Treasurer and Premier Rann were down at AAMI Stadium pledging to give $100 million to the South Australian National Football League. It was delayed in the Mid-Year Budget Review, and now it has gone completely. South Australians cannot trust this government to deliver on any of the promises in this budget. It has broken promises in the past and it will break them again. This is a budget full of promises just waiting to be broken.

A state Liberal government would have delivered a budget that provided a long-term vision instead of merely looking to the next state election. The state Liberals have demonstrated vision by releasing policies for the future, policies on water and a master plan for Adelaide that sets out a vision for providing a City West precinct and includes plans to be part of a World Cup soccer bid using first-class sports and entertainment facilities. It is a vision that enhances public transport. It is a vision that brings alive and preserves the Parklands by staking out a greater role for state government in planning decisions in the city and in the Parklands, just as we tried to do with the Victoria Park precinct.

Finally, I want to touch on sport, recreation and racing. Predictably, sport, recreation and racing were some of the lower profile areas that got a raw deal in this budget. As Sport SA and other stakeholders continue to tell the opposition, the Rann government is doing little to tackle the lack of quality sports and recreational facilities In South Australia. One positive aspect of this budget details that $1.7 million will be provided in 2010-11 for an upgrade of the Santos Stadium running track—something we have long been calling for. Again, I am concerned that this is one of those promises that will be lost in the ether of hot air. An upgrade of the Eagle Mountain Bike Park has also been flagged.

There was an entire section dedicated to sport, recreation and racing in the Treasurer's budget speech last year, but this year there is not a word. For me, that was the first clue that sport, recreation and racing was going to be neglected in this budget. As far as racing is concerned, the industry is already struggling. It is disappointing to find that $2.2 million in government funding pledged over the next four years for the Summer Racing Carnival has now been scrapped. For an industry that is already on its knees, this is a real kick in the stomach. With those comments, I commend the bill.

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (16:56): Before I begin, I want to make a number of comments in regard to the—

Members interjecting:

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins): Order! The Hon. Mr Wortley has the floor.

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY: Thank you, Mr Acting President. I refer to the contribution made by the Hon. Robert Brokenshire the other night. I was not in the chamber at the time, but I was in my room listening to it. It amazes me how sanctimonious the Hon. Mr Brokenshire can be when criticising this government's budget with regard to a number of items and underfunding. The Hon. Mr Brokenshire was a minister in a government that delivered deficit after deficit after deficit, year after year after year—along with these characters on the other side of the chamber. He was part of a government that starved education, health and our police force. It is all very well to be sanctimonious in this chamber and it is all very well do a lot of talking, but there is a difference between talkers and doers. There are talkers and doers in this chamber. The Hon. Mr Brokenshire happens to be one of the talkers and members of this government are the doers.

Having said that, it is with a sense of pride that I rise today to support the objectives and terms of the eighth Rann Labor budget, which was recently handed down by the Treasurer. In doing so, I look back on and endorse the remarks I made at this time last year, in an entirely different economic environment, about the government's plan for our state. I noted then that it was Labor's constant intention to continue to foster an inclusive society—a society that allows people to achieve their best while protecting its vulnerable members; a society that recognises both the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead of us. Those remarks are just as valid now in the context of the most severe economic downturn in living memory as they were at this time last year. I re-endorse those remarks now because they are and always will be the hallmark of Labor's commitment to the electorate.

Our commitment remains strong and steadfast, despite the stormy economic weather that has buffered our state and country in recent months. That the present global recession was the crucible for the 2009 budget is unarguable. We all know that international economies and institutions are reeling from the effects of the present crises. Avenues of capital have been hard hit; our trading partners have been adversely affected; and a number of our export markets have been significantly eroded.

Although we are not immune to the effects of the global recession, we can have confidence in our position, due to the budget surpluses so reliably delivered to date by the Rann Labor government—budget surpluses delivered while still investing in vital infrastructure and services in health, education, police, transport, justice, the environment and, in particular, our water security, as well as job creation and tax reform.

It is undeniably the case that revenue streams to South Australia have been significantly adversely impacted by global events. Such is the nature of this economic crisis, no advanced economy and no advanced country are immune. So, the challenge for Labor has been the continuance of that investment in jobs, services and infrastructure while retaining fiscal discipline and safeguarding our finances into the future. It is a measure of the strength and foresight of this government that our state's AAA rating has been confirmed, even in the current circumstances. This is an enviable achievement.

Before addressing the budget measures in detail, I want to briefly hark back to my remarks this time last year about the government's task of alleviating the damage done by the previous conservative government—damage done over the years of under-investment, disinvestment and the profligate sale of our state's assets, much to the detriment of the whole community.

I refer to the years of decline in our rural and regional areas and years of neglect in health, education, transport and many other vital areas. This was the abysmal legacy that the Rann government has worked so hard to turn around. Given what may lie ahead of us, it remains the case that those opposite are still demonstrably unfit to put themselves forward as an alternative government.

They may have elected a new leader—their fourth in as many years—but factional infighting will continue to dog their steps, as it has for generations. In fact, Dean Jaensch recently commented in The Advertiser that 'factions have dominated the internal machinations of the Liberal Party for more than 40 years'. He said that its history through those 40 years suggests the party has no alternative but to fix itself before it will have any real chance to convince voters; and I could not agree more. Meanwhile their traditional bailiwicks—the rural and business sectors—have rightly turned their backs on the rabble that calls itself the Liberal Party. I can only say that I await developments with interest, but I would like to now return to my main theme.

While the global economic crisis will result in net operating deficits for the states and the nation, we have planned carefully to return the budget to surplus in good time by delivering our capital works program and supporting jobs. I turn now to the nuts and bolts of this 2009-10 budget. This is essentially a budget about jobs—jobs for South Australians. Infrastructure spending will total $11.4 billion over the next four years. A total of $3.9 billion will be expended in 2009-10, with associated benefits of nearly 14,000 jobs. The Rann Labor government enjoys an excellent relationship with its federal counterparts, and this is demonstrated in the Rudd government's trust in providing decisive levels of additional funding to this state.

It is in the context of this partnership that I offer two examples of our enhanced capability over the next four years. First, there is $1.5 billion for new education initiatives under the building and education revolution program, which is part of the nation building economic stimulus plan. This will include capital works funding of $842 million for government schools and $337 million for non-government schools, delivering new gymnasiums, libraries and classrooms, and representing an unprecedented level of investment in our children and their future. Some $692 million will be committed to families and communities, with priority being given to new public housing, disability services, homelessness and overcrowding in indigenous communities.

This expenditure will be augmented by over $4 billion on health this financial year—an increase of 93 per cent in health expenditure since this government was elected to office. Our health reform program, unlike that of those opposite, is cohesive, consistent and based on reality, not on an array of ill-thought-through proposals they have propounded.

The Queen Elizabeth, Lyell McEwin, Berri and Whyalla hospitals will undergo redevelopment works, as will the Flinders Medical Centre and the Glenside campus. Preliminary work and project work on the new 21st century Royal Adelaide Hospital will continue, as will works towards the GP Plus centres at Port Pirie, Elizabeth and Marion.

I alluded earlier to our strong partnership with our federal colleagues. The strength of our relationship is highlighted by the fact that this partnership will provide $546.1 million over the next four years for health infrastructure and services, including: a new health and medical research institute, to which $200 million has been committed; $60.9 million to augment the improved functioning of our emergency departments; $53.9 million towards urgently needed improvements in indigenous health—so important given the increase in the rate of chronic diseases, such as diabetes and kidney disease—and $51 million towards additional midwives and nurses.

I turn now to the government's commitment to water security. An additional $2.1 billion will be allocated over the next four years to ensure that our water supply is absolutely secure. This budget has earmarked $833 million for South Australia's $1.8 billion desalination plant, from which the first water will be delivered by December next year.

In addition, $164 million will be expended in the current year to upgrade and expand water recycling infrastructure and wastewater treatment plants. This is just part of the total $413 million to be expended over the next four years. Members will be familiar with the exceptional circumstances interest rate subsidies for the drought-affected areas. The budget provides that these will continue for another 12 months thanks to a contribution of up to $93.6 million from the commonwealth and an additional injection of $10.4 million from the state.

I turn now to transport. Our commitment to public transport infrastructure has been amply demonstrated in recent years. Indeed, it was in the context of last year's budget that we announced the commencement of a 10-year program to extend, redevelop and electrify our public transport infrastructure. We are now supplementing that program by extending rail services to Seaford, at a cost of $354.2 million over four years, and electrifying the Noarlunga line. A range of other transport initiatives will be implemented ahead of schedule.

The completion date of the Gawler rail line will be brought forward two years, with a total investment over four years of $335.5 million. The link between the O-Bahn and the city will be improved over a three-year period, cutting travelling times dramatically. Road safety, a particular interest of mine, has not been neglected in this budget. Roadside hazards on rural roads will be addressed, as will junction anomalies and signage. An additional $23 million will be allocated over the next four years for these purposes.

Business is one of the most important engines of our economic progress. As an acknowledgment of that, on 1 July the payroll tax rate was reduced to 4.95 per cent in accordance with our promise. The tax-free threshold was increased to $600,000. This demonstrates our commitment to our business partners. Even so, we know that many South Australians are doing it tough. Consequently, despite falling revenues resulting from the global economic crisis, this budget contains no new taxes. What this budget does contain, however, is additional tangible support for our workers.

Let me just mention a few of these initiatives. We will address the skill shortage through an investment of more than $155 million over the next four years. This will provide more than 55,000 training places. TAFE workers and students will be pleased to know that TAFE infrastructure will be improved to meet demand. In a major innovation, we will establish a photonics and advanced sensing institute at Adelaide University and a learning and research hub for materials and minerals science at Mawson Lakes.

Security of our citizens is also paramount. The Rann government is committed to maintaining law and order in our community, and the provision made in this year's budget reflect that commitment. The operational budget for South Australia police has increased to more than $660 million this year. This represents an increase of more than 5 per cent on last year's allocation. Our police academy is to be redeveloped at a cost of $59 million of which $5.4 million will be spent in the current year. As a result, the state will have an advanced training institute for our young police officers of the future offering state-of-the-art technical facilities.

The safety of the people of South Australia in times of trouble is also of paramount importance. I refer not only to the community's expectation that police and related services will rapidly attend emergency events. Unfortunately, we are all too well aware of the devastating effects on lives and property of, for example, bushfires and other large scale natural disasters.

To ensure our safety, we will upgrade the government radio network to digital technology over the next four years. More than 95 per cent of our state is covered by this network (one of the largest in the world); without it our police, ambulance personnel and emergency services cannot respond to calls in the timely and efficient fashion our community expects. The digital upgrade will enhance that speed and efficiency to the benefit of all. Other enhancements for the safety and security of our people include expanded DNA testing services, videoconferencing facilities in prisons and an expedited opening of the Sturt Street courts.

Finally, I turn to the government's establishment of the Sustainable Budget Commission. The commission will examine the budget process, recommend improvement mechanisms and put forward savings strategies. Given next year's election and related imperatives, the commission will be putting forward a suitable date for the 2010-11 budget. Comprehensive work on budget improvement strategies will begin following the election. The establishment of the Sustainable Budget Commission demonstrates the Rann government's commitment to fiscal discipline, one of the hallmarks of Labor's management of our state's finances.

The response from the stakeholders and related groups to this year's budget has been extremely positive. The Advertiser editorial of 5 June noted that a number of sound budgets had been delivered since 2002 but that 'none had been framed in the context of such a challenging global financial environment'. The editor commented:

…this is a disciplined budget which, if compared to those produced by other States, gives an impression the State's finances are under control and the economy is well placed to withstand the buffeting it is certain to receive from the downdraft of the global financial crisis…In a nation that is seen, globally, to be surviving strongly in the midst of a crisis, South Australia is a stellar performer!

Business SA commented:

Maintaining the State's triple-A credit rating is a major boost and the Treasurer should be applauded for securing the future borrowing ability of the State.

The Executive Director of Adelaide University's Institute for Social Research stated:

The State Government is sensibly using its capacity to borrow at low interest rates to help boost the economic activity in support of the Federal Government's stimulus. This is a prudent strategy during a downturn.

The Property Council of Australia (SA) noted:

The debt we accrue now will crystallise into an economic legacy on which future generations will prosper…(the Treasurer) has delivered a sound budget in these tough times.

Again, I could not agree more. This is a budget of which South Australians, once again, can be proud. A budget which is acknowledged as economically sound and which anticipates genuinely unprecedented social and infrastructure investments. As I said on this occasion just 12 months ago: it has been up to Labor to do the hard yards, to repair the years of Liberal neglect, to take on the future and plan for the expectations of South Australians—for themselves and their children. Those words hold even more—

The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire interjecting:

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY: Here's our sanctimonious Mr Brokenshire. Very well, Mr Brokenshire, I am glad you are here to join us today. Those words hold even more truth now in the current context of global uncertainty and decline. Labor is ready for the challenges of the future. Its leadership is solid; its plan carefully thought out; its aspirations for our community apparent for all to see. I commend this budget wholeheartedly.

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

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