Coast Protection (Significant Works) Amendment Bill

Introduction and First Reading

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11:07): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Coast Protection Act 1972. Read a first time.

Second Reading

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11:07): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I am delighted to be able to bring this proposed legislation to parliament and will be sending it to the Minister for Environment and Water as soon as it has been introduced in order to hope that we can have a conversation and find a way to have this supported across the chamber.

We know that the management of our coastline, and in particular in this instance the management of our metropolitan coastline, is a vexed issue. There are three significant challenges that face Adelaide's coastline. One is, of course, the natural movement of sand that appears to have occurred for millennia, where sand naturally moves from the south to the north. The second is the encroachment of development along the coastline as Adelaide was settled, as housing and other property was built along the coastline and, of course, developments were approved over time that intruded into the coastline: marinas, basins and so on.

A third challenge, which sits over the top of almost everything we contemplate in this chamber, is the impact of climate change, the expectation not only that there will generally be higher sea levels around the planet but that increasing severity of storms will occur and there will be increasing frequency of those storms. Of course, what sits alongside climate change is the tragic loss of biodiversity that we are seeing.

All three of those come to bear when we have to consider what to do about the movement of sand. All three affect these beaches that have lost sand and the beaches that have gained sand and had it incorporated into complex dune systems.

Understandably, when talking about the movement of sand and the management of our Adelaide coastline, there are community concerns that are expressed at every point—community concerns for people who live in proximity to areas where sand is being collected and transported further south and community concerns where people live near beaches that have been severely denuded of sand. The people of West Beach, in particular, have been suffering for some time with the lack of sand on that beach. The people who live in the Semaphore South and Semaphore Park area have had a groyne put into the sea there, just offshore, to facilitate the collection of sand to assist further south. That has had a significant effect on the integrity of the dune system south of the Semaphore jetty.

There is also the challenge that has been experienced in other parts of Adelaide, but not yet in my neighbourhood, of the installation of sand pumps. Some people say that that has made a positive difference; others have seen, with some dismay, the extent of disruption caused by the installation of the sand pumps. There is some question about whether the pumping of the sand further south than West Beach has itself contributed to the diminution and lack of sand on West Beach, because it has created a closed loop. All these are issues that the community is aware of and that they have different and varying concerns about, some consistent and some at odds with each other.

There are also significant environmental concerns about the integrity of the coastline and the quality, nature and health of the seaweed and the sand grasses that used to be plentiful off our coastline, which were severely diminished by the way in which we chose to push untreated effluent and simply fresh water out into the gulf. These are sand grasses that are essential to the health of our marine ecosystem, including, as we head further north, the capacity to host fish nurseries for fish to be bred, which of course is an important part of our industry and our recreational and community life.

These concerns can occasionally find expression in frustration and anger with various points of government policy, and both sides of politics have experienced that over time. This bill seeks to make available to the minister additional power—not to require the minister to undertake but to be available to the minister—to recognise that an environmental impact statement might be an improvement in both the quality of the knowledge available to the minister and the Coast Protection Board, and therefore the community, and also the capacity for the community to engage, to be consulted and to make sure that their views are heard through the consideration of how to undertake the sand management processes.

I know that in recent times, last year, the community particularly invested in the quality of the dunes between the Semaphore and Largs Bay jetties. They would have appreciated an environmental impact statement on what was proposed to be done at that point. They would have appreciated it in order to have a better understanding of the likely impact on the environment and also because there would have been appropriate community consultation through an environmental impact process.

Last year, that was largely obviated through the government decision to not proceed with putting a road through the dunes to facilitate truck movements. However, it was not entirely obviated, because nonetheless there is sand collection occurring between those two jetties; it occurred just a few weeks ago. Now what is starting is a further process north of Largs jetty that will be taking sand in trucks along under Semaphore jetty and down to restore the dunes that have been damaged in Semaphore South.

I talk about my area because I know the way that the community feels most closely, but I also know about how the people who live around the Henley area—Henley South and West Beach—feel about the desperate need for sand to be located down there. What I know very clearly, though, is that everybody wants to know the environmental impact of different decisions: the impact on the dune system and the impact on the sand management process itself.

This bill creates the opportunity for a minister to form the view that a proposed sand movement is of such significance that its decision-making processes ought to be strengthened by having an environmental impact statement. What this bill further does is require that, through that process of undertaking an environmental impact statement, there would be appropriate and deep consultation with the council and with the local community.

I have had significant concerns raised with me by people who are concerned about what is happening north of Largs jetty in the Largs Bay area. There is significant concern about what they perceive to be a lack of consultation over that matter, consultation that occurred very briefly, that occurred in the midst of people being very concerned about the pandemic. If we take ourselves back only five or six weeks, it was deeply troubling for South Australia and for Australia. They are concerned that that lack of deep and appropriate consultation has meant that their voices have not been able to be considered when the minister has made a decision about taking sand.

This bill is intended entirely to be useful. It is not intended to bind or force a minister. It is intended to give a minister the power and the opportunity to avail himself or herself of a further element of information gathering and consultation that would mean a sound decision can be made in full knowledge of the environmental impact and the community views both of taking sand—the manner and quantity of taking sand—and what occurs for the beach that is receiving the sand.

I have been on record and am very interested to see how fast the government is able to accelerate extraction and sand from an external source rather than the constant rotation from beaches further north, an external source to buttress what is a very serious circumstance in West Beach. I hope that that acceleration is occurring. I understand it is the policy position of the government, and I urge them to move that as fast as possible. Understanding the environmental impact of that process might also assist in understanding how long that solution might last.

I urge the government to consider this bill. I will, as I say, be sending it to the minister, and I hope that the minister might find a way to support what is intended to be a constructive and useful amendment bill to supplement the information he has available to him.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Pederick.