House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Bills Electricity (Vegetation Clearance) Amendment Bill Electricity (Vegetation Clearance) Amendment Bill Electricity (Vegetation Clearance) Amendment Bill Introduction and First Reading Introduction and First Reading The Hon. D.R. CREGAN House of Assembly Kavel The Hon. D.R. CREGAN (Kavel) (10:32): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Electricity Act 1996. Read a first time. Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. D.R. CREGAN House of Assembly Kavel The Hon. D.R. CREGAN (Kavel) (10:33): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Electricity (Vegetation Clearance) Amendment Bill 2025 is intended to effect discrete amendments to the Electricity Act 1996 to ensure that orchardists in the Adelaide Hills receive adequate notice of vegetation clearance works. Members will recall that the contractor to South Australia Power Networks engaged to clear vegetation under powerlines recently entered into a commercial apple orchard in the Adelaide Hills and cut sections of apple trees before harvest and while they were heavily laden with apples. It might be observed that no professional or competent arborist acting reasonably would carry out any works on apple trees immediately before harvest. It may well be suggested, if only by South Australia Power Networks, that they must enjoy an unfettered right to conduct clearance works because of the risk of bushfire in my community or elsewhere. Setting aside for a moment the commonsense observation that, first, the works could have been carried out competently at a time other than before harvest and, second, verdant apple orchards represent one of the lowest bushfire risk profiles of any vegetation in the Hills, entities which enjoy significant legal protections to enter into and remain on land for vegetation clearance purposes, and who cannot exercise those rights competently themselves or through a contractor, will naturally be the subject of legal reform. A sound public policy response is required to cast on South Australia Power Networks or its contractors a legislative obligation to engage in effective consultation before works are carried out. Far from imposing any new cost or burden on SAPN, this legislation is intended to ensure that a company which enjoys every protection under the Electricity Act acts reasonably when dealing with other commercial interests in my community. Given the small number of commercial orchardists in the Adelaide Hills, and indeed in other parts of the state, including the Riverland, I would be particularly unsympathetic to the idea that this change would impose any unworkable administrative burden on SAPN should it be extended to other regions of the state. All commercial entities, including those who enjoy monopoly-like protections under the Electricity Act, must always be mindful of the commercial risks being taken by unregulated companies who do not enjoy regulated monopoly protection, such as small orchardists. Should this legislation not be taken up by this parliament, I understand that Matt Schultz, who is standing as an Independent candidate in Kavel, intends to take up the matter in the next parliament, should he be elected. Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Odenwalder.