Legislative Council Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time SARDI Fish Deaths SARDI Fish Deaths The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition SARDI Fish Deaths The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (14:25): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking questions of the Minister for Primary Industries on the investigatory report on mortalities at finfish and shellfish hatcheries at the South Australian Aquatic Sciences Centre. Leave granted. The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: The minister, in late afternoon on Friday of the Gather Round, released her department's investigative report on mortalities at finfish and shellfish hatcheries at the South Australian Aquatic Sciences Centre, which openly admitted that no water samples were collected at the time of the mortality event. That is somewhat baffling, considering that sand placement activities and dredging, both known to disturb potentially toxic sediments, were happening within 150 metres of the SARDI intake pipes. Within the report, the recommendations page somewhat strangely starts with recommendation 4 rather than recommendation 1. This has raised significant questions with regard to the report. My questions to the minister are: 1.	What were the initial recommendations listed 1 to 3 inclusive? 2.	Why were these recommendations removed from the report that was made public? 3.	Has there been any other information altered by either the minister, her staff or anyone else in the government department from the original version of the report? The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN Legislative Council Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development Minister for Forest Industries The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (14:27): I thank the honourable member for her questions. I am also pleased that she is referring to the transparency that has been part of this investigation when she says that the report 'openly admitted' that water samples were not taken. That does speak to the fact that all those involved are very keen to be able to, first, acknowledge where there were gaps in what was available and, secondly, as I have already outlined, then go forward in terms of addressing those gaps. I am not quite sure what the honourable member is referring to in terms of the numbering. I can certainly find out whether there has been some kind of typo or something like that. I am not aware that it apparently starts at recommendation 4, and therefore I think we should certainly note that her assumption that it means recommendations were removed is not necessarily the case at all.