House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate Western Mount Lofty Ranges Water Allocation Plan WESTERN MOUNT LOFTY RANGES WATER ALLOCATION PLAN Mr PENGILLY House of Assembly Finniss Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (15:53): I draw the house's attention to what is going on at the moment in relation to the western Mount Lofty water allocation plan. It is being conducted by the Adelaide Hills and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board. It is interesting that—and I say good on him—Mr Leon Byner of FIVEaa has picked up on this matter and has mercilessly pursued the subject and certain officers that he believes are not acting appropriately. I am appreciative of the fact that the Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water, etc., chose to meet with me and a deputation of farmers from the Parawa area. Farmers—and I am talking about full-time farmers who provide food and fibre to the world—are greatly concerned by the possible ramifications of some of the ideas that have been floated by this plan. The members for Heysen, Bragg, Davenport, Kavel and me as the member for Finniss are all getting lobbied heavily by our communities regarding the possible impact. I would argue most stridently that we look after our water resources. That has never been in question. However, the fact of the matter is that, if you live on the land and work with the land—and I am sure that various ministers in this place have been out and about and know the passion that farmers feel for the land—you are not going to do anything stupid to put your water in jeopardy. It just does not work like that. In my own area, we value water highly and we manage it appropriately. It is simply not good enough to frighten the daylights out of the rural community by putting up preposterous plans in some cases which do not take into account the local geography and the fact that the rainfall pattern has changed, even within a kilometre. I have a constituent at Mount Alma who has a large area of land—probably one of the largest farms up on those high ranges on the southern Fleurieu, off Inman Valley. He spoke to me at length just recently about his concerns, because his rainfall varies from 40 inches in the old terms back to about 20 inches within two kilometres. The blanket conditions they want to impose is simply just not feasible; it is totally ridiculous. He has put forward his concerns. He is a highly active member of the rural community, and he will be expressing his concerns in a submission. I met him again on the side of the road a couple of weeks ago and he again expressed his concerns. It is the future of agriculture—in this particular case, it is my electorate of Finniss that is at risk here—and it is the future of the dairy industry, as well as the meat industry and all types of other industries, but particularly those two. The farmers in those industries are doing it tough enough—particularly the dairy industry—without having a vast imposition put on them under these plans. On top of that, in the Fleurieu area, we have the Fleurieu swamps which come under the EBPC Act, which is a commonwealth act. They need to be able to put in dams. They do not need conditions that are too stringent. I know of one operator who wants to fill in six dams and put in one of a decent size near the Fleurieu swamp, but it looks like the overbearing bureaucracy will prevent him from doing that. He employs 16 people. Now, he will downsize his operation and possibly go to beef rather than dairy, and that will mean jobs going. I say to the government: we need to get this right. We have no argument with proper planning for water, but I hope the minister will take charge of this and ensure that we get a sensible outcome, because we have no underground water on the southern Fleurieu. We have underground water further north, we have all sorts of different issues with all different types of water, and one blanket cover does not fit all. That is the important issue. So, I urge the government to take note. I note that the minister has retained his portfolio, and I just hope that, along with the marine parks debacle—and we will come to that later—he will get hold of this and do something sensible. I urge the government to look at it sensibly.