Legislative Council Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Low-Flow Bypass Systems Low-Flow Bypass Systems The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council Low-Flow Bypass Systems The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:06): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Water, Climate Change and Sustainability a real question. Members interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Proceed with your question. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: Thank you, sir. Media reports indicate that, notwithstanding extensive criticism that the minister has had about the lack of commonwealth money coming across to South Australia for improvements to water flow in the Murray-Darling Basin system, and particularly with respect to the Lower Lakes, the minister, on behalf of taxpayers of South Australia, is receiving several million dollars for low-flow bypass infrastructure. In the report it says that this was due to lobbying by both the minister and the Nick Xenophon Team. My questions to the minister are: 1.	Was it the Nick Xenophon Team that led the way or was it the minister who led the way in lobbying for this money for these low-flow bypass infrastructure projects? 2.	Will these low-flow bypass infrastructure projects be compulsory or will they be voluntary? 3.	How does the minister intend to get started with low-flow bypass projects now that, I am advised, he has money available? The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (15:07): I thank the honourable member for fantastically excellent questions. I could not have written them better myself. So, I thank the Hon. Mr Brokenshire for the ability to stand up again and talk a little bit about some of the great work that we are doing with the commonwealth, with local communities, with the NRM board and with other political players, who want to learn more about low-flow bypasses. I have spoken in this chamber several times previously about this. I had a visit, not that long ago, from the member for Mayo, Rebekha Sharkie, who wanted to talk to me about low-flow bypasses in the Adelaide Hills. Just to recap, to refresh people's memory, we are essentially talking about an ability to make sure there is continuous flow down creek systems in hilly regions where there may be dams up and down that tributary or that system. Currently, as the situation sits, particularly with turkey nest dams and dams on creeks, for example, nobody, not the environment, not the farmer next door and not the farmer downstream, actually gets any benefit of the rainfall until the first dam at the top of the catchment fills up. That is problematic for a whole lot of reasons. It is not good in terms of agricultural practice, it is not good for good neighbourly relationships and it is not good for the ecological sustainment of that creek system. Hence, discussion about low-flow bypasses, which are technical devices to allow some water to bypass that dam at the very top of the system for sustainment of the ecological health of the creek system, but also to allow water to trickle down into other farmers' dams further down so that they get to see some of the benefits of those early rains. It's about fairness, it's about better ecological outcomes and it's about a better way of being involved in farming practices on these steep slopes. So, that's to recap, that's a brief history. You will recall that I advised the council, probably 18 months ago or maybe a bit longer, about an international competition that the Adelaide Mount and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM board launched in terms of designing low-flow bypasses. They went out to the world and got a great response. I don't have in my head the number of people who responded, but they responded internationally as well as locally and interstate. Some of them were incredibly technical, incredibly expensive highly engineered structures, while others were incredibly simple and amounted to a piece of poly pipe and some flow mechanism and were incredibly cheap to purchase and operate. Arising from these fantastic technical solutions, we have now approached the federal government for some funding to go into a design phase and a trial phase. I understand that we are talking with landowners in Carrickalinga at the minute and establishing a cooperative relationship to test some of these products at Carrickalinga with the support of the local community and the local farmers. That, as I understand it, is what the funding we have received from the federal government is about. It's to allow the director of the NRM board to test some of these devices to see whether you get the best, optimal outcome by having devices on every dam, or whether you only need to do it on a few key points in the stream system, or whether, in fact, they are key dams that need to be part of the process while others don't have to be. Again, it's about better environmental outcomes for the water system, better agricultural and water outcomes for neighbouring farmers, and hopefully it will be something that will be embraced by the local community. Certainly, we are doing it with the cooperation of landholders in Carrickalinga, as I understand it. I offered the Hon. Rebekha Sharkie a briefing on this with officers at Carrickalinga. If the Hon. Robert Brokenshire wants to participate in this—I understand that's down your neck of the woods so perhaps I can let you know about the date. The Hon. R.L. Brokenshire interjecting: The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Yes, indeed, I can let you know the date we are setting up for Rebekha Sharkie. You might want to bunk in with us and have a look at what we're doing at Carrickalinga.