HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-05-31 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Cross Border Commissioner Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 5 May 2022.)

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (16:32): I rise to speak on the Cross Border Commissioner Bill and indicate that I will be the lead speaker on this bill. At the outset, I want to note that we will be supporting this bill, notwithstanding that I will be moving amendments to improve this legislation. Those on this side of the chamber, as Liberals, believe in free enterprise. We are committed to removing barriers to trade and promoting the free flow of goods and services.

This bill would establish a cross-border commissioner to identify key barriers for economic development in the cross-border regions. This bill would establish a cross-border commissioner to advocate for a simplified regulatory environment for business growth and labour mobility in the cross-border regions. Both functions have the potential to deliver significant benefits: benefits to trade, benefits to a freer flow of goods and services, benefits that support our belief as Liberals in free enterprise.

This bill would also establish a cross-border commissioner to facilitate better access to services for cross-border communities, services that include education, justice, health and community services; better access that would improve the lives of many cross-border residents who confront challenges each day because of that invisible line that they cross to move livestock from one paddock to the other, that invisible line that stops the school bus from collecting its students, that invisible line that forces firefighters to switch radios or channels.

We acknowledge the unique challenges that cross-border communities experience in their daily lives because of different regulations and legislation between states and territories. It is certainly something that has been a part of my life as a Riverland resident and of my community's life. I have experienced my own challenges, faced as a veterinarian living in a border community, working both in South Australia and in Victoria, not to mention the incredible difficulties that my community faced during the height of the pandemic when movement was restricted across the border.

Often, families were literally physically separated from one another for months on end, with one parent at home just across the border on the farm working and the other parent having to move into town on the other side of the border to allow children to continue to attend school. This put tremendous stress, both financial and emotional, on those individuals affected, and they are still recovering.

We recognise the opportunities and potential benefits that a cross-border commissioner could deliver. I would like to acknowledge the member for Mount Gambier for his continued advocacy in this area. The member for Mount Gambier first encouraged parliament to consider the appointment of a cross-border commissioner in 2018 during a contribution he made in the other place. As the local member for a cross-border community, it comes as no surprise that he would seek out opportunities that have the potential to streamline processes and reduce red tape for residents and businesses. As a good local member, he is advocating for his community.

I noted earlier that those on this side of the chamber, as Liberals, believe in free enterprise. We also believe in working towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives, a government that avoids stifling structures and bureaucratic red tape. So whilst we will be supporting this legislation, we do so with caution. We do not want another expensive layer of impotent bureaucracy. We do not want an election commitment ticked off, a job for the boys, a ribbon to be cut on the new office and a self-indulgent annual report seeking to justify it all.

If the government is going to commit $2 million of taxpayers' money, and if the government is going to deliver on the expectations of the community, then it is incumbent upon them to ensure the cross-border commissioner can do more than just advocate for cross-border communities, because in this role we already have the role of a member of parliament, as so effectively demonstrated by the member for Mount Gambier, as well as the member for MacKillop, the member for Hammond and the member for Chaffey, to name some of those hardworking, diligent members of parliament who represent cross-border communities.

It is incumbent upon the government to ensure that the cross-border commissioner has the necessary resources, structure and accountability to achieve tangible results that deliver measurable improvements for residents in cross-border communities. Anything less is a waste. Anything less risks nothing more than a duplication of government and bureaucracy. Anything less, and our focus should instead be zeroed in on improving upon the way departments are run, decisions are made, resources allocated and the attitudes and motivations of the public servants responsible for the development and implementation of policy, procedures, and legislation.

I note that New South Wales appointed a cross-border commissioner in 2012 and Victoria appointed a cross-border commissioner in 2018. Both jurisdictions do not have legislation to support the position. Therefore, if we are going to legislate for this position, a very important position nonetheless but not one that any other state has legislated for, we need to ensure that the legislation adequately reflects community expectation and is based on outcomes rather than a series of talkfests.

I will be moving several amendments in my name so that this bill is necessary and will do more than just add another layer of bureaucracy. The minister has confirmed that the office of the commissioner will be based in Mount Gambier. We believe that the legislation should ensure not only that the commissioner's office is based in Mount Gambier but that the cross-border commissioner is a resident in a cross-border community.

Lived experience is critical. Those of us who live in the regions know that the last thing country people want or need is someone from Adelaide's CBD trying to tell them how they should be living their lives. In our opinion the commissioner must reside in a cross-border community to really understand the issues that cross-border communities face. It is as simple as that.

We also believe an independent review of the operation of this act should be conducted after this act has been in operation for a period of two years and at the end of each period of five years thereafter. The review will determine if the objectives of the act remain appropriate and how effective and efficient the cross-border commissioner has been in meeting its objectives.

We believe the commissioner should have the power to require information from agencies or departments relevant to the performance of the commissioner's functions, a provision that is consistent with the Small Business Commissioner Act 2011 and the Commissioner for Kangaroo Island Act 2014. Finally, we believe the commissioner should be responsible for preparing, and keep under review, management plans setting out:

1. The proposal of the commissioner in relation to the provision of infrastructure, the effective delivery of services and other matters relating to cross-border communities;

2. The priorities that the commissioner recommends be pursued in order to implement the proposals; and

3. Strategies for consulting and engaging with persons or bodies whose cooperation is required for the effective implementation of the proposals.

The cross-border commissioner should be more than just a mechanism for identifying and considering the complexities and challenges experienced by cross-border residents. The cross-border commissioner should be a mechanism for prioritising, initiating and effecting change that removes barriers to trade and removes barriers to a free flow of goods, services and people.

Without a management plan, there is also no legal means by which the commissioner must seek the views of the local community, whether that be the local council that may be directly affected by a proposal by the commissioner, or a mum-and-dad business, or indeed an individual member of the community. In the current bill, there is scope for an annual plan and for the commissioner to:

…work and engage with all tiers of government, business and the community to ensure the needs of cross-border communities are considered in the development and implementation of policy, procedures and legislation…

However, there is no clear requirement—or rather, no clear minimum requirement—as to the level of work or engagement that the commissioner must undertake with that cross-border community. I would have thought, at the very least, the commissioner should be legally bound to seek the views of the local council in relation to a proposal and must, by public notice, inform the community about the proposal and invite interested persons to make a written representation on that proposal.

Whilst I am sure that any hardworking cross-border commissioner would always take the views of the local community into account, we on this side of the chamber believe that should not be left to the discretion of the individual commissioner, particularly given we are going to the trouble of legislating for this position. If we are going to do this, let's get it right.

Simplifying red tape will improve the lives of cross-border businesses and residents, but improving local infrastructure has the potential to generate exponential growth of local industries. The cross-border commissioner should be ambitious in its scope. We should demand it and the community should expect it. We would also suggest that the cross-border commissioner be an active participant in, and should be part of, the Emergency Management Committee where appropriate going forward. This would enable cross-border communities to have a voice at the table when dealing with any future pandemic management decisions.

Whilst the challenges for cross-border communities have always existed, we recognise that since the COVID-19 pandemic there has been increasing and widespread regional support, and indeed support across the state, for a cross-border commissioner. Local communities want a mechanism that they can work with and that can work with businesses, community organisations and all tiers of government to address the challenges they face in their daily lives and the barriers they experience to growing their local economy. But let's make sure we establish something that can meet their expectations.

Communities along South Australian state borders interact closely with communities that exist just over the border. We recognise the challenges that flow from that close interaction and the need for greater efforts to improve the experience of residents in those communities. We look forward to those in this place considering and supporting our amendments to ensure the cross-border commissioner is more than a paper tiger and that it does indeed help to improve outcomes for people and businesses in cross-border communities like my own.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (16:44): I rise in support of this bill on behalf of the Greens. I recognise that the opposition have amendments and will certainly consider those and look into the detail of those over the next few days. Broadly, we do support this bill, and I want to commend the government and the minister, the Hon. Clare Scriven, for putting this forward because it is an important innovation and something that the Greens have been advocating for and something that many in the community have been advocating for as well. We certainly welcome the commitment that the new government has made in this regard.

As has been stated, we recognise that cross-border communities face complex issues. People and businesses in those communities can often fall through the gaps in terms of living on the edge of different jurisdictions. Many people in these communities live in one state and can go to school in another. They face challenges in terms of medical appointments. It might be that they go to see a specialist who is based in another state.

We saw some of the complexities emerge during the bushfires in 2019-20. There were significant issues in terms of jurisdictions that were confronted by the CFS and emergency services. These things were problematic and they need to be addressed. I think that is an area where this new commissioner could play an important role.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, we saw real challenges for people in these communities where they were forced to interact between complex rules in different states. That created a lot of uncertainty and anxiety in those communities. Again, I see the commissioner being able to play a really important role in terms of addressing some of those issues and ensuring that communities are not falling through the gaps in terms of the laws of different jurisdictions.

It is worth noting that the lives of many people who are in cross-border communities are lived in more than one state. The Greens believe that there should not be barriers to them being able to access the public services that so many of us take for granted in metropolitan South Australia. They should not be discriminated against on the basis of the community in which they reside. They should not be discriminated against simply because they fall between different jurisdictions.

Under this bill, a new cross-border commissioner would be established. This commissioner would look at a number of these issues as presented to them by the parliament. We see this as being a real opportunity to improve the lives of those living in cross-border areas and a real opportunity to reduce the barriers that can result from these multijurisdictional issues.

Both New South Wales and Victoria have cross-border commissioners already in place. According to the Victorian Cross Border Commissioner, residents, businesses, local governments and other organisations bring hundreds of issues to them, demonstrating a need for such an institution for South Australian communities. A South Australian cross-border commissioner could work collaboratively with their counterparts in other states to ensure that these communities have equitable access and opportunities and to ensure that there is seamless service delivery, and we certainly welcome that.

I note the honourable opposition leader's comments regarding ensuring that this role is not a paper tiger. We certainly agree with that, but we want to make sure that they are not just a paper pusher either. We do not want them to be caught up in red tape and confined by too much complexity in terms of the legislative framework as well. It is certainly in that spirit that we will consider the opposition's amendments. As I say, we are supportive of the bill. I commend the government for putting it forward and we look forward to the committee stage.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (16:48): I rise on behalf of SA-Best to speak about this bill to establish a cross-border commissioner. We support it in principle. The need for this type of position became evident during the state's sudden border closures during the worst stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021, that is, in the pre-vaccine era and before the state hit its high ratio of vaccination in our population.

The State Coordinator, as we know, had to make some difficult, tough and immediate decisions that did not sit well with or suit border communities in South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales, particularly the more populous regions in the South-East, the Riverland and around Broken Hill.

Those decisions failed to fully consider the close business ties and social networks as well as the needs of those communities for health services, business, employment, emergency services and education, on both sides of the borders. Various state laws and regulations also added a complex layer to the frustration that restrictions imposed.

We also experienced situations where South Australians attempting to return home from interstate suddenly found themselves stranded on the wrong side of borders for weeks. Their complaints on their urgent need to get to their homes were not addressed in a timely or organised manner. There were mercy medical flights that were either stalled, diverted or had to be abandoned. Freight was banked up for kilometres. There was also a fatal accident involving trucks on the Victorian side.

Should the misfortune of a catastrophic pandemic like COVID befall us again I would truly hope that the government of the day, or whomever is in charge of these decisions, does not shut out the rights of people to return to their state, to their homes and to their families. I would like to acknowledge the strong advocacy by members of parliament, state and federal, whose electorates straddle borders in raising concerns of their constituents, as well as those just across the borders, during the maddening times of the pandemic. These are members like Troy Bell, Nick McBride, Tony Pasin, Senator Anne Ruston, Rowan Ramsey, the Hon. Nicola Centofanti, the Hon. Clare Scriven, Tim Whetstone and Adrian Pederick. Their loud voices for reason and compassion led to action and a more commonsense approach in difficult, frustrating and sometimes heartbreaking times for their communities.

However, it has become abundantly obvious that there is merit in having cross-border commissioners who can act for their communities on a range of issues that are often peculiar to their regions and their way of life, from accessing health facilities, digital infrastructure, education, emergency services and employment, through to sporting and cultural events that border communities do share.

There are also laws and regulations which differ across borders that can be a barrier to service delivery and would require cooperation and coordination between the affected states. I will note that mutual recognition legislation, recently passed, does come into force in July which removes red tape and restrictions on a range of qualifications gained in different states.

The cross-border commissioner can help deliver positive social and economic outcomes by acting as a conduit for their communities and making them better places to live. With borders to South Australia, New South Wales and Tasmania, across Bass Strait, encompassing some 300,000 people, Victoria recognised the need for its commissioner in 2018 and it appears to have been working quite productively with New South Wales, which has had its commissioner for 10 years.

Both states have a non-binding memorandum of understanding to enable them to work collaboratively. South Australia, on the other hand, shares five land borders, with Western Australia, the Northern Territory, Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. I would expect our minister will be seeking a similar MOI with those states and territories and perhaps she can elaborate more on this during the debate.

The opposition has flagged some amendments to this bill, which we are considering. They include clarifications on how the agency will work, a requirement for the exchange of information between government departments and individuals, the preparation of strategies and management plans, and that the appointed commissioner must at least reside in a border community, which SA-Best fully endorses. In this case, should the bill proceed, the government proposes the head office will be in the South-East in Mount Gambier. But, as I have pointed out, our commissioner is certainly going to be a very busy person dealing with five border communities. I commend the bill to the chamber.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. H.M. Girolamo.

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