<!--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="2018-06-19" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="1055" />
  <endPage num="1149" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Murray-Darling Basin Plan</name>
      <text id="201806195c586ad9e072461690000351">
        <heading>Murray-Darling Basin Plan</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4622" kind="question">
        <name>Dr CLOSE</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Port Adelaide</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2018-06-19">
            <name>Murray-Darling Basin Plan</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2018-06-19T14:38:15" />
        <text id="201806195c586ad9e072461690000352">
          <timeStamp time="2018-06-19T14:38:15" />
          <by role="member" id="4622">Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:38):</by>  Can the minister advise what the additional costs might be that could be passed on to South Australian consumers to use the Desalination Plant as part of his plan to achieve water savings in the Murray-Darling Basin?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4837" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Black</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Environment and Water</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2018-06-19">
            <name>Murray-Darling Basin Plan</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2018-06-19T14:38:28" />
        <page num="1083" />
        <text id="201806195c586ad9e072461690000353">
          <timeStamp time="2018-06-19T14:38:28" />
          <by role="member" id="4837">The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Minister for Environment and Water) (14:38):</by>  I thank the deputy leader for her question. I am sure that the deputy leader, being the shadow minister for environment and water, would understand that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is predicated around the fact that any initiatives which deliver that 450 gigalitres of extra environmental flows must not have a negative socio-economic impact. Any socio-economic impact must be positive or neutral from those projects. So, in order to get the go-ahead for any projects, there would be no additional on-cost to South Australian water users because that would not meet the positive or neutral socio-economic test.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>