ROBIN BRIDGE

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (15:33): I want to begin my presentation by expressing my condolences to the member for Colton and Mrs Caica on the passing of their mother and mother-in-law today. Our thoughts are with Annabel and Paul and the family.

Painting the Robin Bridge in Nuriootpa was a task that showed everyday people that not all MPs are afraid to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty—and in my case my face, my pants, my shirt, much to my wife's disgust. To be serious, though, it showed that a member of parliament who is passionate about an issue is willing to take some common-sense but unorthodox action that also saves the taxpayer an exorbitant amount of money.

I found, via FOI, that the last estimate undertaken by the department for painting the Robin Bridge was back in April 2010. The cost was estimated to be approximately $660,000. Given the Weatherill government's track record with blowouts as well as inflation over the last two years, it would be safe to assume that the repainting of the Robin Bridge if undertaken by the government today would have cost at least $800,000.

What thanks did I get for saving the government this money? When I asked the previous minister during question time on 29 November last year if the savings to the government could be spent on dialysis for the Barossa, the minister called my actions in painting the bridge 'stunts of a local politician', and spoke about James Hardie and its failure to put adequate safety measures against asbestos in its factories which resulted in the death of people. That has nothing to do with this.

The minister also said, in relation to my painting of the Robin Bridge, 'I hope he doesn't get into trouble for it.' I have said ad nauseam that I knew that the bridge was originally painted with lead-based paint, but there was hardly any left on the bridge, and I took measures to stop any further pollution to the creek below. On the other hand, the government had taken no action and had allowed lead paint flakes to drop into the river for years.

What thanks did I get for saving the government hundreds of thousands of dollars—a thank you? No; contact from the EPA to say my actions would be investigated to see if they had resulted in pollution to the river. A senior EPA investigator and his officer visited the Barossa Valley on two days to conduct an examination of the site, and two more days to undertake separate recorded interviews with both myself and the professional painter, Mr Craig Marston, who volunteered his time and his team's time to get the bridge painted. This year I received a letter from Mr Stephen Barry, manager of the Investigations Branch of the EPA, dated 3 January. It stated:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has completed its investigation into the painting of the Robin Bridge at Nuriootpa on 22 and 23 November 2012.

An inspection of the Bridge and its environs by the EPA on 1 December 2012 found no evidence of paint scrapings and the methods described by you to collect the paint that was sanded would have minimised the risk of paint particles entering the waters.

The EPA is satisfied that in the circumstances of this incident the potential environmental impact was minor and no further action will be taken.

Amen—end of quote. Another win for common sense, but how many taxpayers' dollars were wasted undertaking this investigation? I was inundated with messages of support from constituents following media reports that I would be investigated by the EPA for my conduct in painting the Robin Bridge. Many also expressed their absolute disgust at the waste of resources used to investigate my actions—and I could not agree more.

During the interrogation by the EPA senior investigator I was asked, if I had the opportunity again (if I knew I was breaking the law), would I still paint the bridge? I responded that I would. Before I finish, I want to put on the public record that I did not send out a press release on any of this. It was an ABC reporter on holidays in the Barossa who had been walking past who blew the whistle. It went to national ABC within an hour.

Papers in all states of Australia and New Zealand ran this story; also radio stations, particularly the 2UE drive home show. All but one of the papers in Australia ran this story—all of them except one. Guess which one that was? The Advertiser was totally silent on the issue. Why was that? The question is: why were they so embarrassed? It was laughable. Clever joke—call it what you like; it was not supposed to be a stunt. That is perhaps how it turned out but I want to thank the ABC particularly, and ABC National and also the local papers, The Leader, The Herald and The Bunyip. Yes; if I was asked to do it again I would.