Paul Starick: SA’s decline as a federal battleground state

The Whyalla rescue was always going to soak up a chunk of SA’s pre-election budget but spending for the rest of the state is looking strikingly sparse, writes Paul Starick. Here’s why.

The Whyalla steelworks in Whyalla, South Australia. Picture: Nicholas Williams-Chamarro / AFP

Hauling Whyalla back from the brink of a wipe-out with a $2.4bn steelworks rescue was always destined to soak up South Australia’s share of a pre-election federal budget.

But the full impact of the Whyalla package, announced on February 20, is strikingly highlighted by two small items spirited away in the budget documents.

These two revelations chart the decline of South Australia as a federal election battleground state, ahead of a poll to be held sometime in May.

Beyond Whyalla, SA gets a relative pittance while the eastern states are lavished with infrastructure billions.

The first item groups among “fiscal risks” the $2.4bn federal/state package, labelled “Government Support for Whyalla Steelworks”.

This includes federal funding for the $1.9bn joint commitment to “the long-term transformation of the steelworks” and leaves open the prospect of “further funding to support an extension of the administration process”.

The second telling clue is an “Investing in infrastructure” map, boasting of the billions being pumped into projects across the country – except in SA.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese visited with workers at Whyalla Steelworks earlier this year. Picture: NewsWire / Tim Joy

The sole item for our state is $125m for Curtis Rd Level Crossing Removal, while the battleground state of Queensland, for example, gets $7.2bn for safety upgrades on the Bruce Hwy.

The electorally crucial western Sydney region gets $2.3bn for “critical infrastructure projects”, as well as $1bn to “preserve the corridor for the South West Sydney Rail Extension”.

This is not to argue against the Whyalla intervention. The steelworks is the only domestic producer of long products, which help build and maintain railways, bridges, schools, hospitals and so on.

Once Whyalla had drawn the federal cash attention, though, there was not much money left for anything else new for SA.

Ahead of elections, it is instructive to watch where governments spend their money. Little more than 20 years ago, SA had five marginal federal seats.

This drew federal incentives for community environmental water projects, rooftop solar panels and other pump-priming.

These days, Boothby and Sturt are the state’s sole marginal seats. Neither has attracted any major new spending in this budget, although the $15.4bn Torrens to Darlington motorway is backed by substantial federal funding and effectively slices in half the southwestern Adelaide seat of Boothby.

The long-term challenge for SA has been effectively outlined by both sides of politics for some time – to grow private enterprise and boost population.

This budget is the latest reminder that there is still a long way to go before the transformation of the state gains significant traction and SA is a key political and economic engine room.

Originally published as Paul Starick: SA’s decline as a federal battleground state