Parliamentary Committees

Natural Resources Committee: Levy Proposals 2017-18

Debate resumed.

The Hon. S.W. KEY (Ashford) (11:29): I would like to thank members for their contribution, particularly the members for Finniss and Hammond. Although the member for Flinders is a member of our committee, I thank him for his very fulsome response this morning. I think the good thing about the Natural Resources Committee is that we have our members on the committee but we also do a lot of work with other members. I have mentioned the member for Hammond; we see him as part of our group. Certainly, we work with the member for Finniss, the member for Stuart, the member for Goyder, the member for Giles and the member for Chaffey. I am sorry to leave you out of this particular group, member for Davenport.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Does he drink gin?

The Hon. S.W. KEY: I am not sure. There is a slight possibility the member for Davenport might drink gin, but I do not want to misrepresent him in this house. We also have a lot of attention from the member for Bragg. Whenever I hear anything about foxes, I think of the member for Bragg because of her concern about foxes as a pest in her electorate but also in general in South Australia. The member for Mount Gambier, the member for MacKillop and the member for Light all seem to have a very close association with our committee, and that is not even mentioning the previous members of our committee. The member for Little Para (Elizabeth) has certainly kept his interest in our committee.

I want to emphasise the amazing contribution made by the members of the various iterations of the Natural Resources Committee, as well as the volunteers in the area and certainly the DEWNR workers. The member for Flinders mentioned the landowners. I have been really impressed, having had the opportunity to travel around this state with the Natural Resources Committee, at the tremendous input that we have had from landowners, large and small, in the regions.

One of the things the Natural Resources Committee will be doing is a regional report because it is the focus of our government to make sure that there is that agenda on every committee's list, and we feel that we can certainly fulfil that request. The other thing the committee is thinking of doing—and this will be of interest to our fellow Natural Resources Committee people—is looking at an agenda for the next committee. One of the reasons we want to do this is to invite members in this house who have criticisms of the process as it stands. I would certainly endorse the cumbersome timetable that our committee has to deal with, not to mention the natural resources committees out in the regions.

As to the way the levies are raised, there is a lot of discussion on our committee about the inequities of the way in which the levies are raised, and we believe that needs to be looked at again. Also, the work and the relationship with local government need to be looked at, as does the department. At a future date, I will be asking and inviting members of parliament to put in a submission to us about how they think the natural resources framework can be improved. It may be, member for Hammond, that your wife would be a good person, all these years on, to give us her view of how she thinks it has or has not worked.

What we would like to do as a committee is leave an agenda, as I said, that talks about some considerations that the next Natural Resources Committee might want to look at. I thank everybody for their contribution and support. I commend the report to the house.

Motion carried.