Algal Bloom

The Hon. V.A. TARZIA (Hartley—Leader of the Opposition) (16:39): My question is to the Premier: will any beaches be closed due to the harmful algal bloom?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (16:40): This is a significant moment: the Leader of the Opposition has just asked his first question regarding the algal bloom. This is a first. Of course—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: —on this side of the house, we have been dealing—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leader! Premier.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: I simply welcome the Leader of the Opposition’s recent interest in the issue. In respect of the closure of beaches, this is a matter that has been discussed repeatedly at our task force that we have established. The government has received advice, and that advice has evolved it is fair to say, but we have been consistently receiving advice going right back to the establishment of a scientific group reporting to government many months ago now.

In respect of the question around beach closures, yes, this is a subject matter that we have interrogated and, as it currently stands, the position or the advice that the government has received is that it is not anticipated that there will be any need for beach closures because the consequence of beach closures would obviously be dramatic and, of course, is not warranted given the relative discomfort or inconvenience that is experienced as a result of the impacts of the harmful algal bloom.

I note that the Leader of the Opposition has been on radio recounting various sources of anxiety within the community. One can, I think, form their own judgment as to whether or not his objectives there are to inflate anxiety or rather to address it with fact about whether or not people can walk their dogs along the beach, for instance.

The advice that the government has received from SA Health is that people are able to go to the beach. Indeed, if they are brave enough to jump in the water in the cold they can do that, too, but we advise people—on the back of that advice—that where people see discoloured or foamy water then they can work on the basis that that is likely to represent a greater presence of the algal bloom, and one may want to consider whether or not that is a course of action they would like to undertake. But beaches, on the advice that we have received, will not be closing.

There is a range of complex policy challenges that we have with the algal bloom and that is something that no doubt we will traverse as questions continue to emerge throughout the crisis, but one of the challenges that we also have to contemplate is the fact that the algal bloom is now affecting regions where the algal bloom does not exist, which is a function of a perception within the community, a perception fuelled by fear that, indeed, the algal bloom has wiped out the entirety of our coastline when, clearly, that is not the case.

It absolutely has had an impact in a substantial number of areas in the state, quite a severe impact, and one only has to walk along the beach and bear witness to some of the marine life that has washed up to feel somewhat disconcerted that this is happening in our state of all places. It is confronting and it is challenging. It can quite legitimately provoke a response that is not just emotive for people, but has a significant psychological impact, and we should be acknowledging that and seeking to address it where we can.

But it is also true that those of us in positions of leadership have a responsibility to not unnecessarily exaggerate the pain in the community by creating the perception that there are places in our state where you can't walk on the beach when you absolutely can. That is a balance we continue to pursue. We do it under difficult circumstances, and we would very much welcome a bipartisan approach from those opposite for responsible and mature discussions around the harmful algal bloom.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before I call the leader, I just remind members on my left that interjecting is contrary to standing orders, so I draw to your attention, member for Chaffey, that you are warned for the second time; member for Flinders, twice as well; member for Frome, twice as well; and member for Heysen, once.