The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: I move:
 That this Council calls on the Environment, Resources and Development Committee to be required to investigate and report on rail links with the Eastern States to ascertain the best configuration for the future development of South Australia.

I do not intend to speak at length on this matter. It has been entertaining my mind for some time and what brought it to a head was my attendance as a member of the Environment, Resources and Development Committee at a meeting in Sydney of representatives of parliamentary environment and public works committees of Australia. At that joint conference, there was significant discussion about links between Sydney and Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne and there was even some brief discussion about the alternative link between Melbourne and Darwin. It got me thinking that perhaps South Australia, whilst pursuing the Adelaide to Darwin lineówhich the Democrats support very strongly and, contrary to claims of some Government members, we have always supported the Government on this and we have praised the Government on what it has achieved so faró
 The Hon. Diana Laidlaw: It is just too hard to remember when you do because it is so rare.
 The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: There is another one. That is twice in two days.
 The Hon. T.G. Cameron: He was on radio this morning giving you a big plug, saying that you were the best Planning Minister that he has seen.
 The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Mr Elliott is on his feet.
 The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: At least a decade, I said. This motion is not a reflection on what we are doing but perhaps a suggestion that we should also look in the other direction. As an example of the sort of problems we have with links to the Eastern States, I point out that it is not possible to have double-stacked trains running between Adelaide and the Eastern States because double-stacked trains will not go through the tunnels in the Adelaide Hills. The potential to double stack railway carriages can have a significant impact on the economics of rail transport and the problem with the tunnels is enough in itself to impinge upon the economics, not just of Adelaide to the Eastern States but also the Eastern States to Adelaide, the Eastern States to Perth and, potential-ly, the Eastern States to Darwin.
 I am also aware that proposals have been suggested from time to time that the line between Adelaide and Melbourne should go behind the Mount Lofty Ranges and come through the Barossa Valley to Adelaide. As I understand it, such a route could take at least an hour off the trip and, because of the change in the grades, it would also lead to reduced fuel use. For both those reasons, it could have a significant long-term impact on the viability of rail transport between Adelaide and the Eastern States, and vice versa. The current structure is a further disincentive for Melbourne to support the Adelaide to Darwin railway line. So far, I have raised two serious concerns and we have only got as far as Murray Bridge!
 Between Murray Bridge and the border, I understand that the line is in reasonable condition, but between the border and Melbourne the line is in appalling condition and, as a consequence of that, it seriously impacts on travelling time, which has created severe disadvantage for passenger transport in competition with other means of transport, particularly buses, which are rail's closest competitor.
 The Hon. Sandra Kanck: It adds an hour.
 The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: If it adds an hour and we add on the time that we could save by not going through the Hills, between 1½ hours and two hours could be taken off the trip for passengers. While time might not be quite so critical for freight, it is still having an impact on some freight services as well.
 In the Eastern States, the proposal is to have very fast trains between Canberra and Sydney and, at the very least, trains that travel significantly faster than the present trains between Sydney and Melbourne. If we are to look at the routes to the Eastern States, we might even ask whether we should continue to use the current form of trains. Should we look at superior tracks that will carry superior rolling stock? I do not pretend to have the answers to those questions, and that is why it should be referred to the committee.
 I would go further to ask whether or not the current route is the best route, because to send freight to Melbourne and then to Sydney is a rather long deviation. If there is a new Sydney to Melbourne route we could re-examine the route between Adelaide and the Eastern States and even meet that line halfway between, which would give us greater efficien-cies into the Sydney market, and the Brisbane market, as well. I would also argue that, with that major upgrading, we have then provided the Melbourne to Darwin railway line. I find it of concern that there are two projects on the drawing board, one which is being called the Adelaide to Darwin railway line and the other one is called the Melbourne to Darwin line, when it could be one projectóMelbourne to Darwin via Adelaideóthat we should be promoting.
 We have been so focused on getting the Darwin to Alice Springs line built that we have not looked over our right shoulder and recognised that the biggest disincentive for support for that route from the Eastern States is that their linkage into it is at the moment inferior, and therefore they do not see a lot in it for them. I argue that, even with the current proposal, there is a lot in it for them but, if the ERD Committee was asked to look at the issue of links to the Eastern States, these are the sorts of things that could and should be taken on board.
 It is not my intention to speak at great length. I have raised the key concerns at this stage. I think that a review of our links to the Eastern States is overdue and, being a member of the Environment, Resources and Development Committee, I have a great deal of confidence in the committee's ability to look at issues like these and contribute something positive-ly for the State. I urge all members to support the motion.
 
 The Hon. DIANA LAIDLAW secured the adjournment of the debate.

 
Site assisted by Intramedia Design