David Fawcett (Wakefield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to address the House on the issue of water. This is a very important issue for us in South Australia, being the driest state in the driest continent in the world. I have had considerable feedback from people in my electorate, over the last few weeks in particular, because of the way the whole issue of water has been remarkably poorly managed in South Australia. There are long-term issues around the flows in the Murray and the drought, but over the last few weeks we have seen an approach which has caused a considerable degree of anger amongst constituents. I have had feedback from people by phone, from surveys, letters and emails and at shopping centres. In fact, one of the most popular things we have been able to provide for people in our shopping centre visits are things like little hourglasses to help them monitor shower usage and things like flow restrictors for their taps. People are looking for those small, practical ways to help as well as the bigger picture things.

The anger is there because of the decision of the state government to restrict water rather than look at ways of actually providing it for people. One of the ways they have done this is that they have sought to restrict outdoor watering, which is a fairly small percentage of the total metropolitan use of water in South Australia. People do not mind that in itself so much; it is the fact that they have gone about it in a way which is really nonsensical. I have worked with industry people like Milton Vadoulis, who runs a nursery in Gawler. He has explained in some detail the impact on the nursery industry that these restrictions have had. It means that all of the investment people have made in sensible ways of efficiently using water, such as dripper systems, have been banned, yet people are free to throw any amount of water they like onto plants using buckets. There is an unlimited supply of water if you want to use a bucket. There is absolutely no restriction on how many showers, spa baths, loads of washing or anything else people do inside the house. Yet they have banned the most effective way of watering plants outside, which has had not only an impact on private residents but also an impact on the whole nursery industry.

That debate has raged in South Australia, and public pressure has caused the state government to look at reversing their position just this week. But the debate is not really about drippers versus buckets; it is about a way forward. It is about providing better options for water for South Australia. It is about saying, ‘We need to focus on a future plan about provision and not restriction.’

The Australian government has already been taking steps down that path. We have looked at provision in two ways. One is in terms of preserving and making better use of the water that we have. In 2004, the $2 billion national water fund was announced, and this has led to a whole range of projects which have benefited the community in Wakefield. In 2007, the $10 billion national water plan was announced, leading to the Water Act 2007, which for the first time will give us a national approach, getting rid of overallocation of water down the Murray system and investing considerable money in fixing up infrastructure so that we do not waste the water that we have.

In South Australia the water fund has led to around $620 million worth of investment, which has led to better management of nearly 75 billion litres of water. This is through things like extending the Bolivar pipeline, which we committed to back in 2004. It has not been until this year—three years later—that the South Australian government has actually chosen to match our contribution to see that pipeline extended to make use of waste water in the horticultural sector. Tonight I am calling on the South Australian government to treat the horticulturalists in the Virginia area fairly when it comes to getting rid of the overallocations of water in that area. To just arbitrarily remove their entitlements or cut them back is unfair. They need to find a better way to do that.

There have been community water grants for things like Waterproofing Northern Adelaide, where we are making far better use of stormwater run-off. We have put some $38 million into that. We have funded local government to the tune of some $20 million to make better use of waste water. So there are a range of areas where we are taking the initiative to provide water through better infrastructure.

However, we also need to see the provision of alternative sources of water. Mr Rann has prevaricated for far too long about whether he will commit the South Australian government to a desalination plant. The federal government has been calling for some time now for him to commit to plans to bring to us a proposal so that we can look at the options to co-fund and work with South Australia to provide that alternative source of water. At this time, as we stare in the face of yet another crop failure, another devastating drought, I call on Mr Rann to step up to the mark, put his money where his mouth is and put out a plan for a desalination plant. (Time expired)