Power Infrastructure

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (14:55): My question is for the Premier. Does the Premier think that it is acceptable that damage to high-voltage transmission lines in the north of the state are responsible for the extended electricity outage in Adelaide when the vast majority of electricity generation is also in Adelaide?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (14:55): I think there has been an enormous amount of forbearance on this side of the chamber about supplying information to those opposite. I've looked at all the media that's occurred throughout the course of the day, all the insinuations about the fact that if we only had a coalmine and a coal-fired power station, that somehow that would be the solution—

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —and the fact that there are 23 transmission towers lying on the ground, and that there is a big long thing called a transmission cable sitting on the ground, we are treating the people of South Australia with contempt to not actually know the difference between those two concepts.

Mr Pederick: It's over 200 kilometres north of Adelaide.

The SPEAKER: The member for Hammond is warned for the second and the final time.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: That's essentially what this is: this is the very thing that I think grieves people most about politics in the present era: the idea that you could actually—

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —take advantage of a natural disaster to actually play into it what you think was a cheap set of facts and ideas and to actually—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: I think there is a daunting and horrible sensation that the debate is just turning back onto all those people who decided to play politics with this issue. We've only done one thing, and one thing alone: we've played facts into the public discourse. I've spent every single moment from the time that I have actually first been told about this, since 3.48pm last night, and sent facts out to the South Australian community and to the national community about what has happened here.

Obviously, the people of South Australia and the people of the nation can actually understand the difference between a massive damage to infrastructure. They can see the images of the damage to this power infrastructure. They actually are wise enough to know that when they see a politician pulling out their long-established agenda about their opposition to renewable energy or wind farms and they play that into a crisis before they have on board—

Mr KNOLL: Point of order, Mr Speaker: the Premier is obviously entering into debate, standing order 98.

The SPEAKER: I think the Premier has now made his point, but it's an opportune interlude in which I can warn the member for Schubert for the second and final time and call to order the member for Adelaide. Does the Premier have any further remarks?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Yes, I do. To go directly to the member for Stuart's question, in some respects what we have done is to provide to the South Australian community that needs to understand, why a piece of electricity infrastructure in the Mid North of the state when that goes down, the effect that it has on the system. It essentially is that the sudden change in the frequency of the system, which is consequent upon the removal of this power—the fact that it was threatening to suck an enormous amount of energy across the interconnector—meant that that would have exceeded the capacity of that particular piece of infrastructure.

The rules of this system protected itself so this didn't become a problem for the whole of the National Electricity Market. So, the connection was then severed at the border, and that had consequential effects in terms of tripping the remaining—

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Point of order, sir: standing order 98, the Premier is not addressing the substance of the question. The question was not about why the power went out; the question was about why it took so long—

The SPEAKER: That is exactly what he is addressing. The member for Stuart has raised a bogus point of order. He will depart the chamber under the sessional orders for the next hour—and he's lucky he wasn't named.

The honourable member for Stuart having withdrawn from the chamber:

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: This is a very important point. It is information that the house should have. I think the minister has attempted to explain this, and I am attempting to explain it. The reason why it is important to understand this system protecting itself and protecting the power generation assets is the very reason that we are standing here now talking about the reconnection of something in excess of 90 per cent of the system being recovered. If this system had spun out of control and had damaged these power generation assets, we wouldn't be talking about hours, we would be talking about the restoration of this power system in weeks.

That would be catastrophic, not only for the South Australian economy but for the South Australian community. I think that the South Australian community does understand the complexity of this issue. They do understand the difference between those who are running around saying a coal-fired power station would actually have solved this and when they see all of that infrastructure lying on the ground because of this catastrophic climatic event.