<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2011-07-26" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="4577" />
  <endPage num="4641" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Klemzig Groundwater Testing</name>
      <page num="4616" />
      <text id="201107262c85b3f0bbca427190000610">
        <heading>KLEMZIG GROUNDWATER TESTING</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="546" kind="question">
        <name>Mr WILLIAMS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">MacKillop</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2011-07-26">
            <name>KLEMZIG GROUNDWATER TESTING</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2011-07-26T15:28:00" />
        <text id="201107262c85b3f0bbca427190000611">
          <timeStamp time="2011-07-26T15:28:00" />
          <by role="member" id="546">Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:28):</by>  My question is again to the Minister for Environment and Conservation. Has the EPA undertaken any subsequent investigations in the Klemzig area in order to ascertain whether there remains a pollution plume in the vicinity of the former smallgoods factory on O.G. Road and to delineate the extent of any such plume or is it assumed that the contamination has simply disappeared?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1802" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. P. CAICA</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Colton</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Environment and Conservation</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for the River Murray</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Water</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2011-07-26">
            <name>KLEMZIG GROUNDWATER TESTING</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2011-07-26T15:29:00" />
        <text id="201107262c85b3f0bbca427190000612">
          <timeStamp time="2011-07-26T15:29:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1802">The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton—Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for the River Murray, Minister for Water) (15:29):</by>  I thank the honourable deputy leader for his question and quite simply the answer is this: the initial test was done on the site at 35 O.G. Road. As a consequence of what they found there, testing was done within a 500-metre radius to see whether or not there had been any, if you like, spread of what was found on that site to other areas. Of the four bores that were tested in August, three showed no traces of contamination. One showed some trace contamination or fraction contamination, as I think it is described. Subsequently, that bore was then retested on two occasions and found to be all clear. As a result of that, the EPA determined that there was no requirement to do any further testing because—and I go back to what I said earlier—there is no contamination; there was no contamination.</text>
        <text id="201107262c85b3f0bbca427190000613">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="7">Ms Chapman interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="201107262c85b3f0bbca427190000614">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order!</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>