Fracking

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (15:35): I rise to talk about a controversial issue, but one I am quite passionate about. Make no mistake that this Labor government wants to frack the South-East. What is most concerning to me is that the Treasurer and the government will not acknowledge the concerns of the people in the South-East or look at a social licence and the right to operate in the South-East. Fracking has been a very controversial topic in my electorate, and the concerns of the people of the South-East of South Australia need to be taken into consideration.

It was the Liberal Party that committed to an inquiry before the 2014 election, which was subsequently moved by the Greens and supported by the Liberals in the upper house. That was nearly two years ago and the report has not been finalised. The inquiry is ongoing and has received in excess of 175 separate submissions, most of them raising concerns. The Victorian inquiry into fracking received over 1,600 submissions, and people need to note that Victoria is just 28 kilometres from Mount Gambier.

Victoria took that inquiry and has subsequently banned fracking in Victoria. Tasmania has a moratorium on fracking until 2020. The Northern Territory has a moratorium on fracking in the entire Northern Territory with no expiry date. All these states and the Territory have issues around this, yet we have a Treasurer who will stand there and tell half-truths about fracking, and this is what I want to bring to people's attention.

The Treasurer will say that fracking has been occurring since 1964 in South Australia. That is true; however, in 1964 they used air to frack the rock. These days, they use a process called slickwater fracking, which has only been around since the early 2000s, more prominently around 2005 to 2008. Slickwater fracking is very different from fracking that occurred back in the seventies and eighties because it involves compounds and chemicals that are not readily known. In fact, on page 56 of the Victorian report into fracking, it says:

The exact chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids can be classed as 'commercial in confidence' and not disclosed. …it is difficult for regulators to assess the risks posed by chemical additives if it is not known what those [additives actually are].

The concerns from the residents of the South-East are as follows—and it is very different from the Cooper Basin—so I stand here not opposing fracking in South Australia but raising concerns from people in the South-East. Those concerns include the threat and contamination of aquifers, the proximity to residents and population base (Mount Gambier is the second largest city in South Australia), the impact on prime agricultural land, the impact on the image of clean and green, and of course the tourism impact. Clearly, there is no social licence to operate in the South-East.

I refer to the working papers for the Pacific Energy Summit 2013, which state that the terms 'social licence' or 'social licence to operate' generally refer to a local community's acceptance or approval of a project, or a company's ongoing presence. It is imperative to achieve this social licence for activities to occur, and I think we can see this in the nuclear debate that is going on in South Australia. The government is prepared to spend millions of dollars on that type of debate to gain a social licence, yet it is prepared to ignore the concerns in the South-East and the people's wishes down there. I quote from the Victorian government, which highlights some of the issues that we face. Premier Dan Andrews stated:

Our farmers produce some of the world's cleanest and freshest food. We won't put that at risk…Victorians have made it clear they don't support fracking and that the health and environmental risks involved outweigh any potential benefits.

Time expired.