SA Water

The Hon. J.S. LEE (14:44): I do not need to seek leave to make a brief explanation; can I just ask a question directly to the Minister for Water and the River Murray about SA Water?

The PRESIDENT: You may.

The Hon. J.S. LEE: Minister, do you stand by your comments that SA Water is a nationally outstanding company, as quoted by you in The Advertiser on 12 May; and do you also stand by your comments that SA Water's pipe network is in good condition, as per your reply to a question about water pipe breaks on 7 May?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (14:45): I thank the honourable member for her most important question. I don't need to stand by my remarks, because these remarks are based on Bureau of Meteorology published material. Shortly I will read into the record some of that. I have to say that SA Water does perform incredibly well when it compares to interstate utilities in relation to burst water mains. The facts show that rather than water bursts increasing at an exponential rate, as has been claimed by some, we have actually had 15 years of a stable rate for mains failures, which I can happily list.

The raw figures show just how stable the rates have been, with approximately 4,000 bursts occurring every year for the past 15 years. That figure is an average. It jumps up and down, depending on the climate of the time, of course. I will read out a statistical table representing these figures, which demonstrates just how stable the rates of water mains have been statewide since the year 2000.

The figures are as follows: 2000-01, 4,258 breaks; 2001-02, 4,100 breaks; 2002-03, 4,360 breaks; 2003-04, 4,488 breaks; 2004-05, 4,244 breaks; 2005-06, 4,028 breaks; 2006-07, 4,471 breaks; 2007-08, 4,527 breaks; 2008-09, 4,577 breaks; 2009-10, 4,281 breaks; 2010-11, 3,779 breaks; 2011-12, 3,418 breaks; 2012-13, 3,504 breaks; 2013-14, 3,091 breaks; 2014-15, 3,825 breaks. The 15 year statewide average is 4,049.5.That is pretty stable for a water system that comprises 27,000 kilometres of pipe.

I can only refer the honourable member to the tables in the Bureau of Meteorology's published reports, which I referred to in some of my previous answers. The relevant criterion you need to look at to compare different utilities is the amount of pipe. There is a well-established measure that is used for this, and that is the number of breaks per year, per 100 kilometres of pipeline. That, of course, then stabilises all of the networks because you reduce it by 100 kilometre segments and you can get an average.

During 2014-15 we have had a pretty good outcome. This is again consistent, because we have actually put in the investment to make sure we are having continuous refurbishment of our systems. As the Hon. Mr Wade reflects, the number across the state for the entire pipe network of 27,000 kilometres, for that year, is 14.1 or thereabouts, and if you want to refer to just the metropolitan area, it is around about 19.

The Hon. S.G. Wade: Well, you misled the public last week.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Oh, goodness, keep trying Mr Wade.

The Hon. S.G. Wade: You were talking about 14 last week.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: That is the statewide average, Mr Wade.

The Hon. S.G. Wade: You compared it with the 21 in the same statement.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Well, when you are talking about utilities, Hon. Mr Wade, you are talking about—

The Hon. S.G. Wade interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: This is not debate time: it is question time. You have asked your question.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: —27,000 kilometres of statewide piping. That is 27,000 kilometres, Mr Wade, and that is the statewide result. If you want to focus down on the metropolitan area, I have given you those figures in the past and I can give them to you again.

But the incredibly important issue is to focus on what SA Water is trying to do to drive down the number of breaks. When you look at the figures, when you look at the facts—and I believe this is a very important thing to do, that if you are going to mount an attack on someone mount it on the basis of the facts. Even The Advertiser, which started a campaign last week around water mains breaks, once they looked at the Bureau of Meteorology report and saw the data which shows that SA Water performs exceptionally well, in comparison to other water utilities, they pivoted off on to some other subject. They didn't want to continue that discussion because the data confounded the point they were trying to make.

The data confounded the point they were trying to make. Even if it is just aggregated—the Hon. Michelle Lensink is trying to stir the pot here and muddy the waters—even then we outperform almost every other water utility. We are in the top four in that Bureau of Meteorology comparative report. So, there is just no way for members opposite to try to disguise the fact that SA Water invests heavily in refurbishment of the infrastructure. That investment directly drives down the number of breaks in our pipeline system, and the only way you can compare that is to compare it across 100 kilometres of pipeline per year, the well-recognised industry measure, which the Bureau of Meteorology reports on, in relation to mains water breaks.

I have never said that SA Water is a perfect water utility—I have never said that. I said, in relation to the Paradise water breaks, that work is to be done in terms of our customer relations, how we relate directly to those people impacted by the breaks. When people are lining up to make criticism about the water breaks in the water mains, they need to use accurate information, and that is something the Liberals would not know how to do.