SARDI Fish Deaths

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (14:28): I seek leave to provide a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for Primary Industries about the fish deaths at the South Australian Aquatic Sciences Centre.

Leave granted.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: Oh, not sure those emails are suggesting that.

The PRESIDENT: Leader of the Opposition, ask your question.

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: In February of this year, this chamber resolved that there should be an independent investigation into the fish deaths at the South Australian Aquatic Sciences Centre, at arm's length from potential government influence. On 3 September this year—and I implore the minister to note that date—the opposition received FOI documents, which revealed internal departmental emails suggesting significant alterations to the government's own investigative report, which was quietly dropped on the Friday afternoon of Gather Round.

Internal departmental email conversations reveal the initial draft, written by SARDI scientists, suspected dredging was the cause of the fish mortalities. That draft was then circulated to DEW and the EPA seeking feedback and contribution, with the final version coming to a completely different conclusion than the initial investigative report. FOI requests for earlier drafts of this report—there are six of them—have been refused, citing cabinet-in-confidence. My questions to the minister are:

1. Why are drafts of an investigative report, of which the final was released publicly, deemed cabinet-in-confidence?

2. If indeed the alterations were simply addressing additional information or spellchecks, as the minister has stated on radio, why won't the minister release those previous drafts of the investigative report if there is nothing to hide?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (14:30): I thank the honourable member for her question. Again, we see this whole theme of conspiracy theories which is obviously spreading from the Hon. Frank Pangallo. We have conspiracy theories from the Hon. Nicola Centofanti now—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —as well as the Hon. Frank Pangallo. If the opposition is saying that the policy across government should be that cabinet-in-confidence documents are not in confidence and they are willing to open up all of their cabinet documents from when they were in government, then let's hear that as their policy.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Ms Girolamo, the Hon. Mr Hunter, let's listen to the minister.

The Hon. K.J. Maher: He is okay.

The PRESIDENT: Attorney, come on.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Attorney! I am listening to the minister. Come on.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: So if those opposite suggest that documents should not be cabinet-in-confidence then I assume they are going to be quite willing to open up their four years in government of cabinet documents.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I do appreciate that apart from one of the members opposite, none of those opposite have ever been in government as ministers so they don't necessarily understand the process of getting documents to cabinet. Cabinet-in-confidence means that they are going to cabinet and they are in confidence. The name does certainly give a hint.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Enough! Finish your answer, let's move on.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I suggest that those opposite should stop searching for conspiracy theories and start focusing on the big issues.