House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Sewerage (Water Management Measures—Use of Waste Material) Amendment Bill SEWERAGE (WATER MANAGEMENT MEASURES—USE OF WASTE MATERIAL) AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Second Reading Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 13 September 2007. Page 813.) Mr PEDERICK House of Assembly Hammond Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:16): I rise to speak briefly to support this bill. This is one of a suite of bills introduced by the Hon. David Ridgway in November 2008 when it became obvious to the Liberal Party—and it probably became obvious well before then—that we were in for a major water crisis in this state. As things have unfolded, that has been so true. Along with every member in this place, I wish for heavy rain throughout the Murray-Darling Basin to relieve the situation. When this bill was introduced, it showed the Labor Party's lack of understanding in relation to the supply of water to this state. We were looking for options to relieve pressure on the River Murray. The suite of bills introduced by the Hon. Davis Ridgway in the other place provided for the use of rain water, grey water and waste material. I have seen some good developments, where waste material has been cleaned up for use in industry. In Perth a six gigalitre plant is linked into neighbouring industries. The industries applaud the quality of the water they are receiving. A lot of the phosphates and nitrates are cleaned out so it is exceptionally clean water. When I was talking to the operators of this plant they said that people could probably drink it, but they did not want to go through the pain of trying to get it past the people. We saw what happened in Queensland recently—if a government wants to word a referendum whichever which way, it will get the result it desires. We do have to be smarter with our use of wastewater. In my area a lot of people are putting in systems to capture grey water to use on their gardens. It is a commendable system that can be used. There is some initial expense but, as a result of increases in the price of water, it gives access to water that can be used on gardens. The gardens of Adelaide and South Australia have been suffering as a result of the drought since 2002 and level 3 restrictions. I support the use of wastewater. We should be using 100 per cent of our wastewater, rather than cleaning it up and then pumping it out to sea. That is a flagrant waste. It could be used more effectively in parks and gardens. I believe it could have been linked with Christies Beach and Glenelg so that the water could be pumped to the Langhorne Creek vineyards in my area. It would have been more expensive—around $200 million—but at least it would alleviate the need for another pipeline from the River Murray. We can have as many pipelines as we like, but if we do not have potable water or water which is not high in salinity it is not much good. I commend the bill and wish it safe passage through the house. Second reading negatived.