<!--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="2014-07-24" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="1203" />
  <endPage num="1310" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Site Contamination, Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park</name>
      <text id="2014072423a3d1ce6fc34a41a0000422">
        <heading>Site Contamination, Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="question">
        <name>Mr MARSHALL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Dunstan</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-07-24">
            <name>Site Contamination, Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-07-24T14:53:34" />
        <text id="2014072423a3d1ce6fc34a41a0000423">
          <timeStamp time="2014-07-24T14:53:34" />
          <by role="member" id="4338">Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition, Leader of the Opposition) (14:53):</by>  My question is to the minister for health. Considering the URS report was received on 16 May, why was the decision as to whether SA Health or the EPA was the lead agency still unresolved on 25 June, when the State Emergency Management Committee determined the issue?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Cheltenham</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-07-24">
            <name>Site Contamination, Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-07-24T14:53:54" />
        <text id="2014072423a3d1ce6fc34a41a0000424">
          <timeStamp time="2014-07-24T14:53:54" />
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Member of the Executive Council, Premier) (14:53):</by>  Can I say that that is an inaccurate summary of the position. The position as at that date is that the environment minister through the environment portfolio, the EPA, was the lead for the first phase of this particular matter. What we have not reached yet is the further phase, which was the topic of internal discussions within agencies. These were always going to be matters that would have an initial phase, that initially that EPA was to supervise, and then it may have progressed to other agencies as other considerations then took over.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>