Site Contamination, Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (14:36): In relation to priority number 7, the EPA appears to be stopping short of actually funding a program to update the register. Can the minister outline how much the EPA believes that would actually cost?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (14:37): Resourcing of legacy site contamination cases presents problems for the government. However, we have shown in the past, with the support of Treasury, that where industry has been unable to fund investigations and remediation activities, the government is committed to working together with the EPA to ensure the state has a robust environmental regime. We will use these challenges as a catalyst for change, as we have seen in this report.

In terms of the report's recommendation 7, again a program and a funding plan that will be needed to identify and develop risk profiles and prioritise assessment of sites expected to be subject to potentially contaminated activities—such as dry cleaners, gasworks or landfills—is in the planning stages, but as the honourable member knows, any such requests for increased resources outside of the existing resources of the agency will need to go through a budget process.