HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-09-08 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

State Assets (Privatisation Restrictions) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 18 May 2022.)

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (16:35): I rise to speak on the State Assets (Privatisation Restrictions) Bill 2022, introduced by the Hon. Robert Simms MLC. The bill seeks to prevent the sale, disposal or lease of certain state-owned assets unless reviewed and recommended by a parliamentary committee and approved by both houses of parliament.

The bill has a wide definition of state-owned asset and includes a related corporate body and asset of the following: HomeStart Finance, the Lifetime Support Authority of South Australia, the Motor Accident Commission, the Return To Work Corporation of South Australia, the South Australian Government Financing Authority, the South Australian Water Corporation, the Superannuation Funds Management Corporation of South Australia, and an asset prescribed by regulation.

The now Labor government went to the recent state election promising to take back control of our trains and trams, and made clear that we are not supportive of privatisation. The former Marshall Liberal government, despite claiming before their election that they did not have a privatisation agenda, quickly got on with privatising our aforementioned trains and trams, as well as the Remand Centre. As the Hon. Robert Simms referred to in his second reading speech on this bill, the privatisation of the Electricity Trust of South Australia is one of the most egregious and worst examples of privatisation to the detriment of South Australians that we have seen in the history of this state.

We welcome this bill, which seeks to ensure that the body corporates listed remain in public hands. I also commend the mover of this bill for the sensible insertion of subsection (4)(a), which states that the bill does not prevent the sale, disposal or lease of state-owned assets in the ordinary course of business and operations of a state-owned asset. This is a sensible and pragmatic part of the bill.

I foreshadow now that the government has three filed amendments; however, we will be only moving one of them, which is a minor amendment and which will make the relevant parliamentary committee that would review any proposed sale or disposal of the state-owned asset and report back to both houses of the findings of the review the Economic and Finance Committee.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO (16:37): I am speaking on this bill today as the lead speaker for the Liberal Party in the Legislative Council. As we know, this bill seeks to prevent the sale, disposal or lease of a list of state-owned assets, unless reviewed and recommended by the parliamentary committee and approved by both houses of parliament. I think it is worth mentioning that privatising state-owned assets is not always about money. Privatising has the potential to improve services for South Australians, creating jobs and encouraging competition in the market.

Privatisation is not always the enemy, like it is often portrayed. By taking away decision-making power from the government of the day we effectively are saying that the government is not able to govern its own assets. Let us not forget that, under 16 years of Labor's rule, the concept of privatisation of state-owned assets was not uncommon. The Motor Accident Commission, SA Lotteries and ForestrySA were outsourced to help the Labor Party bounce back from the dreadful debt it was suffering.

The Labor Party is always very critical of privatisation; however, I do not think it is too harsh to say how hypocritical that is of those opposite in the chamber—they privatised anything that was not pinned down. It is also worth recalling that SA Water, once a government department called the Engineering and Water Supply (E&WS), now a statutory authority, albeit being wholly owned by the government, can be used for whatever purposes the government wants. At one stage, the Labor government privately and sneakily investigated the impact of privatising the agency under their rule.

I am sure we will all remember the years and months leading up to the 2018 election, when water prices were among the highest in the country. The independent regulator of essential services in our state was asked by the former government and the former minister, who sits opposition me in this chamber, to keep SA Water's regulated asset base figures up so that prices can remain higher. This has to be one of the most shameful acts that government can undertake: deceitfully changing numbers to make sure that South Australians pay more for water than anywhere else in the country.

I believe the question asked regularly of the former minister was: is this the government using SA Water as a cash cow? The media described it as a money-printing machine for the government. As history now tells us, yes, it was. This was a shameless, shameful act by Labor and the minister responsible for the government-owned agency at the time, who undoubtedly played a huge role in making sure that the regulated asset base figures reflected the outcome they were seeking: more money back to fix their bottom line.

One of the biggest achievements of the former Liberal government was committing to South Australians that it would reduce their household expenditure to ease cost-of-living expenditure for all, and commit to it we did. We made sure that the figures in the regulated asset base reflected the actual value, which then saw prices drop by around $200 per year for families and around $1,300 per year for businesses.

In coming back to the bill before us today, it is important that we bear in mind that the government of the day should have the ability to properly and adequately govern. This bill effectively takes that, and the government of the day's decision-making powers, away. However, we understand that the government is responsible to the community and, therefore, to the parliament.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (16:41): I intend to speak only briefly in giving our strong support to the Hon. Robert Simms' bill. I had the pleasure of serving on Mr Simms' select committee, which looked at privatisation and made a number of recommendations, including the one that is covered in this bill, which will require the parliament to assess and approve any future privatisations of government assets.

I will not go through the past mistakes of both Labor and Liberal governments that have left taxpayers a lot poorer as a result of their poor judgement calls, including the sale of our electricity assets, the SA Gas Company, the Motor Accident Commission, the lands titles office, Forestry, SA Lotteries, TAB and on it goes. If you look back and see just how much money these assets are now generating for private enterprise, their new owners, it is appalling to think that South Australian taxpayers have missed out on so much income.

Governments had a misplaced ideology that they could not run ventures like this profitably and that they were best left to private enterprise. How wrong they were, particularly with energy costs now going through the roof. Electricity prices have not come down. They will not come down, and any political leader or party who promises to do that is a fool.

I note that the Malinauskas Labor government has committed to its election promise to reverse the privatisation of our trains. Let's hope they stick to their about-face on privatisations. We know that privatisations do not work. Our committee heard of the economic and social damage that privatisations can and have caused. Evidence presented demonstrated that there was a need for more accountability and transparency, as well as ongoing monitoring of contracts. Also, there was a need for an independent regulatory body to oversee privatised assets and services.

Thanks to the Hon. Mr Simms' bill, the parliament will be able to scrutinise any proposed sale or disposal of an asset, and both houses will need to approve it. It does not mean privatisation of assets will not happen; this legislation ensures the matter is given full consideration. No longer will there be secret deals done behind closed doors or decisions made within cabinet without full disclosure first being made to the parliament. I commend the bill to the chamber.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (16:43): I want to thank all members for their contribution to this debate: the Leader of the Government in this place, the Hon. Kyam Maher; the Hon. Heidi Girolamo on behalf of the Liberal Party; and the Hon. Frank Pangallo. As the Hon. Mr Pangallo has noted, we were both part of a select committee to investigate privatisation in South Australia and the effects that it has had on our state. As the member has noted, those effects have been devastating.

Privatisation has had a catastrophic effect on South Australia. It has resulted in higher prices, it has resulted in reduced services, and it has resulted in Public Service cuts. That genie was let out of the bottle many years ago by the Olsen government, and we have not been able to put it back in over many years. What we have seen is a fire sale of our state assets, and that has come at a terrible cost for our community.

What this bill does is prevent governments from being able to privatise public services by stealth. It ensures that there is public oversight, a parliamentary oversight, examination by a committee, and approval of any attempted sale of public assets by the parliament itself. I think that is a really important safeguard.

It is a very important safeguard when one considers the extraordinary statements made by the opposition in this place today that demonstrate that they have not heeded the lessons from their recent election defeat. It seems they still have a privatisation agenda, and should they ever return to the government benches in this state, it is an agenda that they will seek to implement once again.

We know from their form they say one thing during an election campaign—we are not going to privatise public services—but hey presto, when they find themselves on the government benches the fire sale begins. Just look at what they have done to our train network. What this bill does is safeguard those public services that have not been privatised, key public assets from privatisation of any future government, and I think that is a really important step.

Should this bill pass both houses of parliament, and I anticipate it will with the support of the Labor Party in the other place, then this will end the practice of government saying one thing before an election and doing another once they find themselves in office because it will ensure that the parliament plays a key role in scrutinising privatisations and blocking attempts to privatise services when it is considered in the state's interests to do so.

I want to thank the Labor government for the constructive way in which they have engaged with the Greens on this bill. In particular, I want to thank the Treasurer, Stephen Mullighan. He and I have had many conversations around this reform, and I have really appreciated the constructive way with which he has worked with me on this, and I really appreciate the government's support of this.

As noted by the Leader of the Government in this place, the Labor Party, like the Greens, campaigned very strongly on opposing further privatisations of public assets in this state, and today this sends a very important message in the parliament that the fire sale of our public assets will end, and I think that is something that will be welcomed by the South Australian community. With that, I conclude my remarks.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1 passed.

Clause 2.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I move:

Amendment No 1 [AG–1]—

Page 2, lines 11 to 13 [clause 2, definition of relevant parliamentary committee]—Delete the definition of relevant parliamentary committee and substitute:

relevant parliamentary committee means the Economic and Finance Committee established under the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991;

In moving this, as I foreshadowed in my second reading contribution, I will inform the chamber again that I do not intend to move amendments Nos 2 and 3, which have been filed in my name. The amendment I am moving, again as I foreshadowed, relates to the parliamentary committee that has oversight in relation to the functions in this act. The government believes the Economic and Finance Committee would be the most appropriate committee to deal with the necessary reviews of the potential disposal of any state-owned asset, and I commend the amendment to the chamber.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I rise to indicate that the Greens will be supporting the amendment. As the honourable Attorney-General has stated, this is a simple amendment. It simply means that the Economic and Finance Committee will be the delegated committee to consider privatisations and we consider that to be an appropriate change.

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Remaining clauses (3 and 4) and title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (16:51): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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