Public Works Committee: Happy Valley Water Treatment Plant Asset Renewals Project

Mr CREGAN (Kavel) (11:52): I move:

That the 126^th report of the committee for the Fifty-Fourth Parliament, entitled Happy Valley Water Treatment Plant Asset Renewals Project, be noted.

SA Water has proposed to install a new dewatering system using centrifuges at its Happy Valley Water Treatment Plant. This will be achieved by delivering new infrastructure and upgrades at the treatment plant, including replacing the current waste treatment and dewatering assets with three new centrifuges to have sufficient capacity and redundancy to meet the current and future peak flow demands and to ensure reliable and safe operation of the waste treatment process by the end of 2021.

The project is part of SA Water's Our Plan 2020 regulatory determination, approved by the Essential Services Commission of South Australia. Currently, the SA Water Happy Valley Water Treatment Plant provides treated water to approximately 450,000 customers in central and southern Adelaide. There is a significant waste treatment plant on site to manage the sludge produced in the sedimentation process. The current dewatering process consists of two sludge presses and one centrifuge with ancillary plant. The presses and associated equipment are the original plant. They exceed 30 years of age and are at the end of their useful lives.

The project requires capital expenditure of up to $13.7 million. Substantial completion and operation of the centrifuge are expected to occur in December 2021. The committee examined written and oral evidence in relation to the project and received assurances that the appropriate agency consultation in relation to the project had been undertaken. The committee is satisfied that the proposal has been subject to the appropriate consultation and meets the criteria for the examination of projects as set out in section 12C of the Parliamentary Committees Act and recommends the scope of the proposed public works to the house.

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (11:54): I am happy to provide a contribution on behalf of Happy Valley and its surrounds. Ostensibly, I think about two-thirds to three-quarters of Adelaide's metropolitan area gets its drinking water from the Happy Valley Reservoir, so it is important that we make sure that investments are made, and I understand that this conversation has been ongoing for some time in terms of the best way to remedy this and the best way to achieve this.

I want to provide a little bit of additional conversation around the Happy Valley Reservoir and the issues that are being raised by local community members in regard to this very important piece of infrastructure. Prior to being the member for Hurtle Vale, as members might know, obviously, I was the member for Fisher, and the Happy Valley Reservoir sat in the centre of the electorate of Fisher.

With boundary redistributions it now sits on the edge, but I still have many thousands of people who are interested in the Happy Valley Reservoir. I would get inquiries to my office daily in regard to a number of areas around the reservoir, so there are a couple of issues. Over the three years as the member for Fisher, I probably had half a dozen inquiries about the use of the Happy Valley Reservoir as a recreational asset, and not all of those were positive.

Some of those people were interested in using it as a site for fishing, or canoeing, or, would you believe, waterskiing. If you have seen the reservoir from the air it would be very unusual to be able to waterski on it, and given the flux in the levels as well it would not be an ideal site. Even to launch a boat for the purpose of fishing, I have been told, it would not be a suitable area.

However, the vast majority of people now who come to me about the Happy Valley Reservoir express concerns about water security, given the plan to open the reservoir to the public for use. I have to say that generally I have been agnostic about it. From a personal point of view, I trust science, and given that I trust science and use evidence-based approaches to the work that I do, I have read the evidence that comes in about the treatment, as well as the to-the-tap treatment level.

I appreciate that the government is investing in this water filtration plant to ensure its safety, but given that time is coming to an end on this session, I will just say that the majority of people who come to me are concerned about it opening, and they are concerned about the water treatment. Is it going to be rigorous enough to protect it if we have people using the reservoir for recreation? These are the questions that people ask.

They are also disappointed that the reservoir has not been used for the solar panel project as was originally planned, and that the pine trees have all been knocked down at the northern end to now be used for solar panels. So the top of O'Halloran Hill is now devoid of trees. There have been quite significant local impacts because of a change of plan around the use and the management of the reservoir.

I have not even started on the kangaroos, because as trees were bulldozed there were injured kangaroos that had to be rescued, and what have you. We get lots of commentary. There is lots of public interest in the area about this. Obviously, we support the investment from a water security point of view, but urge the government to make sure that they continue to investigate and make sure that, with respect to that general asset, the public are listened to in terms of how that asset is used.

Mr CREGAN (Kavel) (11:59): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the committee for its deliberations in relation to this project and, of course, over the year. It has been a diligent, forthright and very focused committee and it has discharged its responsibilities well, not just to the letter but also in the spirit of the act. I thank the member for her contribution in relation to this debate. I particularly acknowledge also our executive officers, who have assisted us so ably.

Motion carried.