House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Stormwater Re-Use STORMWATER RE-USE Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly MacKillop Deputy Leader of the Opposition STORMWATER RE-USE Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:12): My question is to the Premier. Does this government still stand by its position that drinking stormwater is reckless and dangerous, in light of its recent decision to provide over $1 million towards the Salisbury council study into turning recycled stormwater into drinking water? The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly Colton Minister for Environment and Conservation Minister for the River Murray Minister for Water STORMWATER RE-USE The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton—Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for the River Murray, Minister for Water) (15:13): I thank the honourable member for his question. To differentiate us from them I would make this point. The deputy leader has said, and he has been well quoted—not that the quote, or the statement, was very good: 'Look, stormwater, you run it through reeds for a couple of weeks and it's almost good enough to drink.' Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! This is the last question, so please keep quiet. The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: Is it the last question? The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: It depends how long you go for, minister. If there is an opportunity, we will get another one. The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. There is a distinguishing difference between us. Members opposite have asserted on numerous occasions that the most appropriate use for stormwater is for drinking purposes. Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order: the minister is clearly debating. It has nothing to do with what we said; he cannot get that right. The question is: does he still believe that drinking stormwater is reckless and dangerous? The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: I do not uphold that point of order because I am sure that he will get to that response, and this is information which is certainly related to the question and which needs to be taken into account. The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: I believe that it certainly is, madam; but, Madam Speaker, you will decide that. It certainly seems to me that the deputy leader is somewhat confused from time to time because he will say whatever he thinks needs to be said at any time to make a point—quite often without any continuity. Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly Mr WILLIAMS: Point of order, Madam Speaker. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: There is a point of order. Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly Mr WILLIAMS: The question has nothing to do with me or my potential to be confused, which I am not: it is about the government— The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: All right. I will uphold that point of order. Can you get back to the question please, minister? The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: Yes, I will Madam Speaker. I will make this point: we have provided money, which I believe is quite right to do. We do provide money in a variety of areas for all different types of research. This is a contribution to the CSIRO, and we will work very close with that organisation through this scientific arrangement. It will continue to work on the science as to whether or not— The Hon. P.F. Conlon House of Assembly The Hon. P.F. Conlon: Which is what we've said all the time. The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: Yes, which we have always said. In essence, more science is required to— Mr Williams interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The minister is answering the question, not you. The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: —determine whether or not stormwater could be used for drinking purposes. I make this point, too: to adopt the views that were expressed by the opposition in the lead-up to the election was completely reckless. They were irresponsible. In fact, it showed more than anything else their lack of understanding about how you deal with stormwater. Stormwater— Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: —that comes off our streets is very variable with respect to its quality. Certainly, you cannot polish it—and it be reliable to polish it—to even an appropriate fit-for-purpose standard on occasions given— Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Hon. I.F. Evans interjecting: The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: That's right, and there is a major difference between— Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: —the water that falls and comes off someone's roof or comes through the Adelaide Hills catchment than that which falls on Port Road, for example. Quite clearly, we are going to continue to invest— Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! We will just sit here and wait until the end of question time if you keep talking. The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: We will continue to invest in science—science that, ultimately, perhaps, will determine that there are mechanisms and that there are ways by which we can polish stormwater to appropriate standards for potable purposes. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! The Hon. P. CAICA House of Assembly The Hon. P. CAICA: At the moment, what we say is that it can be polished to appropriate fit-for-purpose standards. The difference between us and them is that we are not reckless, as they are.