Drought Mitigation

The Hon. S.L. GAME (16:16): I move:

That this council—

1. Recognises that certain South Australian districts remain in a drought that is among the worst in recent times, and that this drought continues to place devastating mental and financial pressures on these communities, including and in particular farmers;

2. Acknowledges that this drought has severely impacted the production capacity of many farmers and food producers, notwithstanding the state government's recently announced assistance packages;

3. Recognises that small dams on farmers' properties can represent an economic lifeline for farmers, enabling them to water their livestock and irrigate their crops;

4. Urges the Malinauskas government to review its farm dam policy to allow SA farmers to have one dam—up to five megalitres in volume, and a wall height of no more than three metres—for every 100 acres of land they own, without needing a permit through Landscape Boards of South Australia;

5. Calls on the government to ensure that the installation of low-flow bypasses on farmers' properties is voluntary and remains voluntary in South Australia; and

6. Calls on the government to ensure that farmers who choose to install low-flow bypasses must do so at their own expense, not at taxpayer expense.

Today, I rise to speak to this motion on behalf of the many South Australian farmers who battled to survive one of the worst droughts on record for certain areas of our state. These farmers did not experience decent rain for many months, and some have conceded that subsequent rainfall events failed to improve their financial circumstances. Preventing farmers from freely and rapidly constructing and maintaining dams on their properties represents an unnecessary self-harm for this state, hence this motion.

Under the current conditions outlined in the Landscape South Australia Act, anyone wishing to construct or modify a dam smaller than five megalitres with wall heights of three metres or less requires a permit for something known as a water affecting activity (WAA). This WAA must be obtained from a landscape board. Meanwhile, anything larger than five megalitres or greater than three metres in height requires development approval from the farmer's local council.

While most of us are aware of delays typically involved with gaining development approvals from local government, this motion is focused on approvals from a landscape board, which is run by the state government's Department for Environment and Water. One of the conditions for applying to a landscape board is that the application must be received at least two months before scheduled construction works.

Given the unpredictable nature of both weather and farming, this two-month condition is problematic but, more importantly, after consulting with stakeholders, it has become clear to us that this lengthy and often exhausting permit process involving a landscape board must be eliminated altogether. Farmers must be allowed to construct small dams to those dimensions—five megalitres or less in volume, wall heights of three metres or less—so they can literally get on with their business of growing and producing food for South Australia.

Allowing this controlled construction condition would allow a number of farmers to continue pursuing their livelihoods at no cost to South Australian taxpayers and at no cost to the state's environment. Indeed, as was pointed out to us, these dams also act as wetlands with their own ecosystems, plus they are flood mitigation ponds and even emergency water sources in times of fire, helping to protect lives, properties, livestock, implements and more.

Dams of this size are environmentally friendly because native wildlife come to drink out of them. One farmer estimated to our office that dams in this state would currently be collecting no more than 1 per cent of our total rainfall. Bypassing the landscape board system and allowing farmers to make decisions like this on their own land makes sense and has no downside. This proposal is about taking action to protect our state's farmers and food producers, just as the government took action to help the sector earlier this year via millions of dollars in two separate support packages.

In addition to relaxing dam restrictions, this motion also addresses growing concerns over low-flow bypasses. These devices divert water away from dams, ostensibly to environmental flows; however, the amount of water they collect for environmental flows is minimal, particularly when contrasted with the cost, which is less water to grow critical-needs food. We have received anecdotal reports that some of these low-flow bypasses are costing taxpayers up to $50,000 each or even more. We believe the only reason many farmers are agreeing to have them installed is that they have been told that, if they do not have them installed now at taxpayer expense, eventually they will be forced to install them at their own cost.

No wonder farmers are reluctantly signing up; they are effectively being threatened. That is why this motion calls for the installation of low-flow bypasses to remain voluntary in South Australia and for any installed in future to be funded by the individual farmer, not taxpayers. That is a win for farmers and taxpayers and has zero negative effect on the environment. To summarise, the dam section of this plan would not cost taxpayers an extra cent but would save jobs, livelihoods and more, and the low-flow bypasses section of this plan would actually save taxpayers money. Both would help protect farmers and keep them growing critical-needs food.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.