Adelaide Desalination Plant

Mr DIGHTON (Black) (15:06): My question is to the Minister for Housing and Urban Development. Can the minister advise the house whether there is any scientific evidence to support a connection between desalination operations and the occurrence of the current algal bloom?

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION (Taylor—Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Housing Infrastructure, Minister for Planning) (15:06): Thanks to the member for Black for his question. The Adelaide desal plant is a vital part of Adelaide's drinking water supply. We would be in dire straits without it. My advice is that there is no link whatsoever between the algal bloom and the operations of the desal plant. The only reason this is an issue in the public's mind is that we have seen a person—who frankly is a bit unstable, a bit out there, a bit unreliable and bit of a clown—being given a title that is somewhere above shadow minister. He got his own hat with a symbol of 'the watchdog' on it and that went to his head, didn't it?

That little bit of responsibility he took terribly to heart, and he raced out there and put all of this misinformation out into the public realm and all of this misinformation out to a parliamentary committee, quite irresponsibly sowing seeds of distrust regarding our critical infrastructure. Now, as I understand it, the watchdog is becoming a windbag who is in witness protection. What I hear is that you've got him locked away in an office somewhere, hiding from The Advertiser and other journalists who are trying to hunt him down.

Here are a few facts about the desal plant. Since October 2011 it has supplied 212 billion litres of drinking water to homes and businesses across Adelaide. Without that previous investment, as I said before, we would be in dire straits and we would have seen water restrictions. Independent and credible reviews monitor no adverse impact to the local environment. All the discharge from the plant is required to meet strict guidelines and is monitored by the EPA. It's all on the EPA's website and it's part of the provision of the licence.

Here is the thing: in 2019-20, those opposite, under the commonwealth's Water for Fodder program, used the desal plant to produce 40 gigalitres of water for that program—a very important program, I might add. You used it responsibly to do that. To put that into context, between July 2024 last year and June this year, the ADP produced 26 gigalitres of water. So members opposite have used this plant responsibly when they have been in government; they have relied upon it and they will rely upon it again because it's absolutely critical to our water security.

If you were the leader of a major party, a leader of an alternative government, why would you allow someone so unreliable, someone so unstable, someone so unpredictable to have a position of responsibility—a person who has a higher profile than any of the people on your front bench—to go up there to a parliamentary committee and sow distrust in critical water infrastructure? Who would allow that? Only an irresponsible leader. You have a responsibility—not just to hide him away until polling day.

The Hon. V.A. Tarzia: He's not hiding.

The Hon. N.D. CHAMPION: Well, where is he? Are you committing to him going out there? Are you committing to him facing the media? Are you committing to him actually walking back his irresponsible evidence given to a parliamentary committee—are you going to do that?—because that's a test of your leadership. If you are asking to be in charge of this infrastructure, people have got to have some confidence that you will operate critical infrastructure in a responsible manner.