House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Algal Bloom Algal Bloom Mr BASHAM House of Assembly Finniss Algal Bloom Mr BASHAM (Finniss) (14:55): My question is to the Premier. Was the government unprepared for the harmful algal bloom? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain. Leave granted. Mr BASHAM House of Assembly Finniss Mr BASHAM: Flinders University's Marine and Coastal Research Consortium Director, Professor Charlie Huveneers, has said publicly: South Australia was unprepared for this event. We cannot even assess the true impact of these kinds of events on the marine ecosystems because we lack the necessary baseline data and consistent monitoring programs. The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS House of Assembly Croydon Premier The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (14:55): I thank the member for Finniss for his question. It is true that this event, for its size and scale, does not have precedent and that is why there are so many challenges around this. Unlike fires or floods or pandemics or cyber attacks or terrorist attacks or major storm events, there isn't a playbook about how to deal with a major algal bloom of this size or this scale, which is why we have got to respond to it very clearly. As members opposite would appreciate, particularly those who have been in government and been on the Emergency Management Committee of government, there is scenario planning around a whole range of different potential events and circumstances, including a lot of natural disasters. There have not been—as the member for Finniss quotes from a professor—prophecies of this nature in terms of planning and so forth, which is why we have had to respond to this from the ground up. That represents a range of challenges and that is why we are doing everything we can. The best way we do that is we respond and we make sure that, as best as possible, our judgements are governed by the science and by the public health advice, which is what we are doing. I've got to say, I have been astounded by how quick people, even the most adversely affected, have been to acknowledge that fact. They understand that no government agency, no private company, no individual caused the algal bloom. There are a range of circumstances that are beyond people's control and there isn't an immediate solution to the algal bloom. If there was, we would have done it by now. We remain open to suggestions. We are actively pursuing options and investigating potential action that can be taken, but we are also, in the meantime, making sure that we respond to the algal bloom by supporting those communities, those businesses and those individuals who have been most adversely affected with economic support that goes beyond the state government's economic support during the course of the pandemic. This is a challenge. We seek to rise up to that challenge. We would like to do that collectively with everybody who is interested in doing so, but it is important we do it from a basis of fact and knowledge and rely on our experts. SARDI is a very high-quality agency within government. Our experts in DEW are outstanding public servants who are as committed as I have seen, and everybody is working together to make sure that we deliver a thoughtful response. If there is outside information from other experts around the world, we will go and get them. That is why we went and got Don Anderson to come over from the United States. We are open to doing everything and anything that can be done here to confront this challenge. But I am serious about this. There are a lot of people who are being affected who do not need to be. There are people in the member for Flinders' electorate who are being affected by this when they don't need to be. That is a big deal. There are people who are producing South Australian seafood, as the member for MacKillop just referenced, who are being affected. We don't want people to choose not to eat South Australian seafood, even though it is perfectly safe, because they have got misinformation. That is why it has got to be accurate. It is not a political point: it has to be accurate for the sake of people who rely upon us to present facts, and that is what we are going to focus on.