SOUTH-EAST DRAINAGE SYSTEM

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS (14:24): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation questions about the maintenance of the South-East drainage system.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS: The minister oversaw the recent transfer of responsibility—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Stephens.

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS: The minister oversaw the recent transfer of responsibility for the Upper South-East drainage system to the South Eastern Water Conservation and Drainage Board (commonly known as the drainage board) from the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources. However, there was no increase in the funding allocation to the drainage board for this new responsibility, in fact, additional funding initially allocated to the drainage board, which could have been used for this purpose, was removed. Given that the minister was able to fund the maintenance of the Upper South-East scheme through his departmental budget, why has that money not been transferred to the drainage board?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (14:25): I thank the honourable member for his most important question. Over the past two years this state government has provided additional funding for the South Eastern Water Conservation and Drainage Board for the operation, management and maintenance of the South-East drainage system.

An additional $6 million over two years was provided on top of the base funding of approximately $2.1 million. This additional funding has been used to complete urgent asset maintenance, repairs and upgrades on ageing public infrastructure, such as bridges, on public roads, property access, culverts and monitoring stations, so it is completely wrong for the honourable member to assert in this place that we have withdrawn money. In fact, we have given additional money to do additional works.

Future funding really is going to be dependent on alternative sources of income, but I would like to know where those people opposite intend to get the funds that they say we should be putting into the upkeep of the drainage system on top of what we already do. Where do they say we should get those funds? Are they saying that they are going to put a levy on the community—those people who are directly impacted, those people who benefit so much from the drainage system—or are they going to say that every other taxpayer in this state puts their hands in their pocket and subsidises those drainage systems? Is that what they are saying?

Are they saying to us today that they are going to commit another $5 million in the budget should they become the government? Is that what they are saying today? I want to hear it. I want to know what they are going to promise the people of South Australia in terms of their budgeted commitments at the next election but, of course, we are not hearing any of that. Do they have any policy at all or will they just block the passage of a bill that was intended to provide some kind of ongoing security for those in the South-East? That is all we want to do on this side. They have not stated they would not introduce their own levy—

The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire interjecting:

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: This is the Hon. Mr Brokenshire who says that it is the public good of the state. Well, is it in the public good for the state's money to go into the pockets of people who will directly benefit from it? Should they not also contribute to the maintenance of the system? The taxpayer already is. Why should the direct beneficiaries also not contribute? The Hon. Mr Brokenshire—as is his wont—has always got his hand out for government subsidies for himself and those people like him who benefit from public infrastructure, but do not want to contribute.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: Point of order.

The PRESIDENT: Point of order, the Hon. Mr Brokenshire.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: I ask that he withdraw those outrageous remarks. I do not get anything from his government.

The PRESIDENT: That is no point of order.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Mr Brokenshire says he gets nothing from the government. I guess he does not use government roads to travel home. I guess he does not use government infrastructure when he turns on his taps. I guess he does not use anything that is provided by the taxpayer in this state. He has done it all on his own. Of course, that is rubbish. Where will the opposition get the funds—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. D.W. Ridgway: I can't tell the difference between Ian's face and the chair!

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: It is rather warm in here.

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Where will the opposition get the funds to do what the honourable Mr Stephens is implying in his question?

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! The minister has the call.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: They refuse to outline their position, but they are happy to criticise ours—a position that is intended to ensure the upkeep of the drainage system for years to come. It was proposed that from 1 July 2014 expenditure for the maintenance and operation of the South-East drainage system will be partially offset by revenue from beneficiaries of the drainage system through the raising of a levy as proposed by the South East Drainage System Operation and Management Bill. I might need to ask for your ruling, sir, about a question that pertains to a bill that may be before the house, but if I have your indulgence I will continue with my answer.

I reiterate 'only partially offset'. The levy will be collected from those who directly benefit from the drainage system. It makes sense, I think, that those who benefit from the system contribute to its upkeep. This includes the state government, landowners and beneficiaries or people whose activities contribute to the need for a drainage system.

As you know, Mr President, the South East Drainage System Operation and Management Bill was introduced into parliament on 31 October 2012 and includes provisions that I, as Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, may raise a levy to help support an effective drainage system into the future. The bill also proposed that prior to the raising of a levy the minister must undertake a social impact assessment and consult with the South-East drainage management board. The social impact assessment would assess the expected social impact of the imposition of such a levy, including an assessment of the relative private and public benefits of the provision and management of the drainage system.

Unfortunately, those opposite have categorically ruled out supporting the new bill and, indeed, intend to block its passage in this place. As a direct result of their position, the ongoing maintenance of the drainage system is in jeopardy—because of the Liberal party's recalcitrance, because of the Liberal Party's desire not to make a policy decision, and the Liberal Party's desire not to tell the community of South Australia what they intend to do if they were to win government.

The state government has continued to provide funds, but this needs to be partially offset by some kind of contribution from those whose activities contribute to the need to maintain the system. I recently visited the South-East to gain the views of those most affected by the upkeep of the drainage system. I was keen to explore the fairest way to apply some kind of levy. I even raised the possibility of having a much smaller interim levy to ensure that basic works would be maintained on top of what we already do and allowing a period of further consultation within the community. This could have ensured that the community had input into any kind of levy that was applied.

I also approached those opposite and asked them to consider a levy in some form. I approached them and said that we were willing to bear the unpopularity that goes with introducing a levy to ensure that those in the South-East would get the drainage system that they deserve and need. I know and they know that the only way to properly fund the system is by working out contributions from everyone who benefits, not just the taxpayers of this state. I said that the Liberals could not promise that they would not introduce a levy if they were in government and they should let us make the hard decisions.

I did this because of how important the drainage system is for the region, how important its upkeep is and how important it was that this drainage system was properly maintained. However, those opposite have put the entire drainage system at risk by obstinately refusing to consider this bill. The Hon. Mitch Williams was cited in TheSouth Eastern Times, I understand, claiming that he had told me that he would not be supporting the bill.

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: Last time I checked, you guys were in power.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Well, we do like to work together from time to time, and we do hold out the olive branch across the parliament when we are trying to work in the best interests of this state. Unfortunately, the Liberal Party never takes us up on it.

However, the reality of maintaining this kind of system is more than just a popularity contest. I repeat: I would like to know where the Liberals intend to find the funds for the upkeep of the drainage system which they seem to be out there in the community promising that they will deliver on. I would like to know, and so would the people of the South-East, what their policy is.

In the meantime, the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources is working with the South Eastern Water Conservation and Drainage Board to identify operational efficiencies to ensure effective and efficient drainage and wetland management services are delivered to the South-East community.