Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Murray River Shacks MURRAY RIVER SHACKS The Hon. S.G. WADE Legislative Council MURRAY RIVER SHACKS The Hon. S.G. WADE (14:31): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Water and the River Murray questions relating to environmental compliance. Leave granted. The Hon. S.G. WADE Legislative Council The Hon. S.G. WADE: The Mid Murray Council has indicated that it is challenged by the task of controlling illegal development and environmental compliance among 3,000 riverside shacks in 50 settlements along the river from Cadell to Mannum. A report to council in July 2013 states: During late 2007 early 2008 Council raised concerns over the level of unlawful development occurring predominantly in shack settlement areas throughout the district. The report goes on to state that recognising council's inability to adequately enforce the requirements of the Development Act in terms of illegal development and compliance, council wrote to the Attorney-General, the Minister for the River Murray and the Minister for Environment and Conservation. The letters of 2008 and the report of July 2013 address both planning issues and environmental compliance issues. The report goes on to state: In short nothing of any substance eventuated from the exercise and the problems/issues highlighted in the original letter drafted by Norman Waterhouse remain largely relevant today. Later, the report states: To complicate matters more State Government agency compliance functions appear to have been reduced. It is understood the Development Assessment Commission no longer follow up or act on matters of non-compliance in relation to applications where they were the approving authority. The Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (administration of the River Murray Act) likewise have limited inspectorial resources as do Crown Lands SA. I understand the environment department has released a statement today saying that it is considering options. My questions to the minister are: 1.	How many compliance officers do his agencies dedicate to the River Murray compared with 10 years ago? 2.	What options is the government considering? 3.	Given that the council wrote to your predecessor on 25 June 2008 to outline their concerns, when can the council expect tangible action from this government? The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (14:33): I thank the honourable member for his important questions; however, I have to correct him in some respects. He is seeking, I think, to imply in his question that the issue is one for government when, in fact, my advice is that the shacks mentioned in the media recently are not on crown land. They are on private freehold land, which is under the control of councils in other ways. However, he is correct in saying that, notwithstanding that, the department is always happy to work with councils and assist where they can. I am advised by my department that we are not aware of any shacks in the Mid Murray Council area in particular that are considered to be unauthorised use of crown land. However, the department is aware of intermittent unauthorised development—for example, sheds associated with shack areas along the River Murray. There is a higher concentration of shacks, I am told, in the Mid Murray Council area compared with other council areas along the river. However, as I said at the start, most are privately owned and are not on crown land. The council has compliance powers, under the Development Act 1993, to deal with unauthorised development associated with shack sites on privately-owned land. Departmental compliance officers assist councils when requested, I am advised, if a breach of the objects of the River Murray Act 2003 or its objectives for a healthy River Murray have been identified. Where authorised developments involve crown land, the department deals with these on a case-by-case basis as needs arise. The department, as I said, is not aware of any direct request from the Mid Murray Council to increase inspections along the River Murray, but the department does welcome our ongoing interactions with council and will assist, when requested, if it is part of our remit.