SEA LEVEL

The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:02): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning a question about South Australia's response to sea level rise.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M. PARNELL: On Monday evening the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Climate Change, Water, Environment and the Arts released its report entitled 'Managing our coastal zone in a changing climate: the time to act is now'. This report resulted in the headline in The Advertiser yesterday '60,000 homes under the sea'. The first two paragraphs of that report read:

An estimated 60,000 homes and businesses along the South Australian coastline are threatened by storm surges and erosion as climate change worsens, a new Federal Parliamentary report has found.

Even more concerning is many property owners may not be covered by insurance as a warming globe causes polar ice-caps to melt and bring severe storms with accompanying king tides.

When it comes to the approval of new developments, our planning schemes do provide for some anticipated sea level rise. However, these planning schemes do not apply to existing developments. My questions are:

1. Is the South Australian government actively planning for a managed retreat for vulnerable households and communities along the coast?

2. If not, what is the strategy for dealing with established communities under threat of sea level rise?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:03): I do note that a managed retreat policy has been used by the Greens-controlled council at Byron Bay in New South Wales, and that is basically to prevent householders from taking any action to stabilise their properties. Apparently it has also stopped them from renting out their properties, which is another interesting variation. That appears to be the Greens' approach to coastal communities.

In relation to rising sea levels, the honourable member is quite correct, and it is something that this government has been addressing for some time in relation to new development. Of course, some significant work has been done, which is still in progress, along most of the coast of this state, and in rural areas in particular, to try to ensure that communities or dwellings are not built too close to sea level.

In terms of dealing with existing areas, that is another challenge entirely. Obviously, the report that the commonwealth government has put out will just be another addition to the debate that we need to have in dealing with these issues.

In relation to existing developments, there is the Coast Protection Board which comes under the portfolio of my colleague the Minister for Environment and Conservation who has, of course, had a key role in relation to that. The board has been responsible for much of the coastal protection works that are necessary to deal with this issue.

I have not yet had a chance to look at the federal report. The honourable member referred to a figure of some 60,000. Whether that is an estimate or whether it is based on some more detailed mapping I am not sure. I have asked my department to have a look at the report to see whether that adds to the work that we are already doing in relation to dealing with the problem of rising sea levels.

A combination of work will need to be done to protect existing properties along the shore, where it is feasible to do so. In relation to new areas, we clearly need to set standards and re-examine what is the appropriate minimum height above sea level—the AHD levels, as they are referred to—for development. We will have to give further consideration to existing developments—and I am sure the federal report will be a useful contribution to that debate—where properties are already exposed to the sea. I think we have seen some pictures in certain places around the state, including a house near Wallaroo that, during one of these storm surge periods, was almost under water.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: I am not sure of his, but there have been some places already where storm surges affect them. In some cases it may be possible to take the sort of action the Coast Protection Board does to at least shore up those properties, given their expected life times, but that is dependent upon the extent and the rapidity of any sea level rise and then, obviously, things need to be done more urgently.

I noticed at the weekend, when I was at Hindmarsh Island having a look at the impact of some of the river work down there, a sign installed at the Murray Mouth stating that 17,000 years ago during a previous ice age sea levels were 150 metres below what they are now. As I said, that was 17,000 years ago and, through ice ages and global warming, we have throughout history seen the rise and retreat of the sea.

The issue now is with anthropogenic climate change and to what extent that will impact upon us. Of course, no-one really knows the exact answer to that; we can only go on models and predictions. How quickly we have to respond to that is something that we will have to deal with in the future. At the present time, a range of strategies is in place, and the most important one is to ensure that we do not put any more properties at risk. For those already at risk, we will have to simply work through them as best we can. I look forward to absorbing the work of that parliamentary committee and to informing the government's attitude on that.