Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Water Security WATER SECURITY The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council WATER SECURITY The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:13): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for State/Local Government Relations, representing the Minister for Water Security, a question about water. Leave granted. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: I was excited for town, rural, regional and city residents across South Australia to read the Premier's bold declaration (which we are now advised is a vow, apparently) on the front page of The Advertiser today that water restrictions will be over by 2012. There are some bold statements being made at the moment that may come back to haunt our leaders, such as the Treasurer's saying earlier in the week on Matt and Dave's program on 891 ABC that, with the desalination announcement, Adelaide's water security problems are solved—there will be no further problems—by the doubling of the capacity of the desalination plant. At the same time, never mind that irrigators are still on 18 or 19 per cent allocation and will likely be on that for the foreseeable future, with desalination delivering negligible returns to the River Murray for environmental and irrigation purposes. The Premier, of course, pointed to the double capacity 100 gigalitre desalination plant for the reason that water restrictions will be finished by 2012. Finally, the federal government commitment of $228 million for the 100 gigalitre desalination plant will leave the state government with a $1.5 billion bill to build the plant, $500 million more than it was going to cost to build a 50 gigalitre desalination plant. Therefore, my questions are: 1.	When did the government first become aware that the commonwealth was going to contribute $220 million to the desalination plant? 2.	What price change/reduction will there be to the projections on household water price costings on account of this generous gift from the federal government and the resultant doubling of the plant's capacity? 3.	Will the Premier guarantee that the price of household water will not be increased beyond what was projected for water pricing with the original 50 gigalitre desalination plant? The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council Minister for Mineral Resources Development Minister for Urban Development and Planning Minister for Small Business The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:16): The government became aware that the commonwealth confirmed its support for the additional desalination plant on budget night. Obviously, the government had been in discussion for some time with the commonwealth in relation to it, and was requesting it, but confirmation of it came on budget night with the announcement in the budget. In relation to the Premier guaranteeing it, quite clearly, if one is to expand the plant to ensure water security, the state will have an additional contribution to that but, of course, it is a proportionately small cost to double the plant; and that is why it is so attractive. For a 100 per cent increase in the plant the cost is much less than doubling the cost. Obviously, it is clear that, if one is to have water security, there will be the need to pay for it—and that has been made clear. It is obvious that, if we are to have that level of water security and make that investment, it must be paid for.