Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Parliamentary Committees Natural Resources Committee: Upper South East Dryland Salinity and Flood Management Act NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE: UPPER SOUTH EAST DRYLAND SALINITY AND FLOOD MANAGEMENT ACT Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. R.P. Wortley: That the 36^th report of the committee, on the Upper South East Dryland Salinity and Flood Management Act 2002, be noted. (Continued from 28 October 2009. Page 3728.) The Hon. C.V. SCHAEFER Legislative Council The Hon. C.V. SCHAEFER (17:55): This contribution will be even shorter than the last. The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting: The Hon. C.V. SCHAEFER Legislative Council The Hon. C.V. SCHAEFER: It will be difficult! Again, I thank the members of the Natural Resources Committee. This matter was referred to our committee by the Hon. Sandra Kanck some time ago and, indeed, has been very contentious. I think most of us, over a long period of time, have been lobbied vigorously by both sides of the argument with regard to the South-East drainage system. I am sure that you, Mr President, who grew up in this region, would be well aware of the benefits of the early drains that were put through the soldier settler blocks and enabled what was otherwise marshy swamp to become some of the state's most productive grazing country. The system of drains that was mooted, from memory, in the late 1990s was to continue that drainage system in order to drain rising saline groundwater and allow the continuation of grazing, in particular. Certainly, the areas where the drain has been completed are great testimony to the success of that system; the increase in production on those properties is quite remarkable. However, it is a contentious system, and we received a great deal of lobbying from a group of equally committed farmers who believe that the drainage system is not only unnecessary in dry times but in fact detrimental to the environment. In particular, they were people who had wetlands and areas set aside for water birds and other activities. The committee considered all the evidence put to it and sought yet another independent scientific investigation into the matter. This took some time to complete but its assessment was that the drain should proceed, and in the end the committee concurred with that recommendation. I believe that when this water is eventually drained through to the Coorong it will be beneficial to the very bird colonies and birdlife that is of such concern to the group of farmers and others who lobbied the committee. The committee's recommendation that the drain proceed is controversial, but in the end we believe that the science is there to verify that recommendation, and I was pleased to see yesterday that the government introduced legislation to extend the time of the drain so that it can be completed. I am concerned that unless the drain proceeds with some haste then we will have the debacle of neither one thing nor the other—a half finished drain, and goodness knows where it will end up. I urge the government and the DEH to proceed with the drain and to proceed with the new system, which will save freshwater which runs across the top for the wetlands and drain the saline water out into the Coorong. It is an ambitious program. It is a program that should, in my view, have been finished some four or five years ago, so I do hope that we will get on with it again. I thank my other committee members, in particular the chair Mr John Rau, and the two parliamentary staff, Knut Cudarans and Patrick Dupont. Motion carried. [Sitting suspended from 18:01 to 19:47]