Legislative Council Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:49): Can the minister explain what has happened to the Spanish consortia, the 1,000 hectares of glasshouses and the 5,000 jobs he spoke of only just a matter of months ago in this chamber? The Hon. I.K. HUNTER Legislative Council Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (14:50): I thank the honourable member again for a sensible question. It is amazing how they are leading off with them today. It's fantastic. The preferred proponent is still in the running, of course, but our understanding was that the model that provided 20 gigalitres of water for the Northern Adelaide Plains, which we had developed, as the honourable member clearly remembers, was predicated on a tripartite arrangement between the state government, the commonwealth government and SA Water, with each contributing approximately $76.5 million. As that process gained momentum, advice we were receiving from federal connections indicated that it was unlikely that the full amount required to support the 20-gigalitre project would be secured, at least in the first tranche. Based on this advice, we developed an alternative approach to the NAIS project, which meant that the state government would be contributing more financially through SA Water, and we reduced the ask of the federal government. We understand that might get looked on more kindly, from the granting process. As I said in my answer to the honourable member's question, the initial infrastructure will be constructed—if this proposal is supported by the federal government—with a capacity to, at a time into the future, deliver 20 gigalitres, allowing for the scheme's expansion in the future when export markets are established and when production is well established. It may be easier to go back to the federal government and ask for more assistance at that time, having got stage 1 up and running. As I said, the first step is to bring 12 gigalitres of recycled water for irrigation each year through NAIS to develop high-tech, high-value intensive horticulture north of the Gawler River. This enables time for export markets to develop, to prove up the project and to establish a stronger track record to go and ask the federal government to assist us down the track to take water out to the Barossa, as I said in my original answer to the question from the Hon. Justin Hanson. They are not mutually exclusive. We are being agile in presenting the best case we possibly can to get their support, and we look forward to their contribution. And let's give credit where it's due: the federal government gave the state $2.5 million to work up the business case, as I think I have said in this place previously, and in my meetings with the Hon. Barnaby Joyce and the Hon. Senator Anne Ruston they were giving us supportive views and indeed supported the business case funding, and we are very grateful for that. It is for those reasons that I expect, with the trimmed down version of the grant request, that we should look forward to some positive announcements from the federal government in this space.