Drought Mitigation

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. S.L. Game:

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.

(Continued from 17 September 2025.)

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (16:06): I rise today to speak in support of the motion brought forward by the Hon. Sarah Game, a motion that recognises the dire circumstances that have recently confronted our farming communities and proposes a modest practical reform to assist those who have been and continue doing it tough.

This is not a time for political pointscoring. It is a time for listening to our farmers, understanding the realities they face and finding every opportunity to reduce unnecessary barriers to their ability to survive and recover, because the reality is parts of South Australia are still enduring the worst drought conditions in living memory. While some areas have had some significant rain, this drought is far from over. Livelihoods are hanging by a thread. While some assistance has been provided, the gaps in that support remain deeply concerning. That is why the opposition continues to call on the Labor government to implement no and low-interest concessional loans for our farmers and farming communities, but this unfortunately continues to fall on deaf ears.

This motion acknowledges what many of us who regularly engage with regional communities already know: drought is not just an economic challenge. It is a mental health crisis, a logistical nightmare and a deeply personal strain on the men and women who feed our state and, indeed, our nation. Farmers do not ask for special treatment. They ask for practical tools to help themselves.

One of these tools is reliable, accessible on-farm water storage. A single dam can be the difference between holding onto stock or being forced to sell at a loss. It can be the difference between getting a crop through a season or watching a year's effort evaporate in the heat. Yet we hear time and time again that even for a small, low-risk dam, a dam no more than five megalitres in capacity and no more than three metres in wall height, farmers are being forced through bureaucratic processes that are slow, that are incredibly expensive and often disproportionate to the scale of the impact. This is red tape for red tape's sake, and it must be addressed.

The reform proposed in this motion is measured and responsible. It is not an open-ended licence for dam construction but rather a targeted exemption for low-impact, small-scale dams on properties with sufficient acreage. One dam per 100 acres, no more than five megalitres in volume, is a proportionate, rational threshold that strikes the balance between environmental stewardship and agricultural necessity.

We are proposing a constructive amendment—and we have been for quite some time—to the motion to ensure it explicitly covers not only the right to build small dams without unnecessary red tape but also the right to maintain them, because it is one thing have a dam, it is quite another to be able to keep it operational. In doing so, I move the amendment standing in my name:

Delete paragraph 2 and substitute:

2. Acknowledges that this drought has severely impacted the production capacity of many farmers and food producers, and that the state government's recently announced assistance packages have missed the mark, with many of the measures either difficult to access, slow to roll out or falling far short of what is needed;

Delete paragraph 4 and substitute:

4. Urges the Malinauskas government to review its farm dam policy to allow SA farmers to have and maintain one dam—up to 5 megalitres in volume, and a wall height of no more than 3 metres—for every 100 acres of land they own, and to conduct maintenance on those dams, without needing a permit through the Landscape Board of South Australia;

At present, the process for undertaking basic dam maintenance—such as desilting, repairing walls or cleaning debris—requires landholders to submit an application at least two months in advance, pay a fee, and then await formal approval from the Landscape Board. This process is unreasonably slow, especially during times of drought when farmers need to act swiftly. We have heard directly from landowners across the state who have been fined for simply maintaining their own infrastructure.

This is not just poor policy: it is punitive and absurd in the context of the crisis that we have recently faced—and, again, that in some parts of the state we continue to face. Our amendment ensures that maintenance of dams up to five megalitres with a wall height of no more than three metres can be carried out by landholders without being bogged down by bureaucracy.

We all value water sustainability and environmental protection, but our frameworks must also reflect the urgency and the reality on the ground. At present the process for farmers to build, or even maintain, a small dam is bogged down in months of applications, fees and paperwork. In the meantime we see stock die, paddocks go bare, and the mental strain on farming families continue to climb.

Importantly, this motion does not call for the removal of oversight entirely. It simply recognises that we can—and we must—trust our farmers with a greater degree of autonomy, particularly when the dams in question are of a scale that poses negligible risk to broader water systems. If there are particular areas of concern in relation to rainfall or environmental sensitivity, then it may be appropriate to apply additional criteria, but let us start by properly mapping these areas using clear, scientific data rather than relying on bureaucratic guesswork.

The Hon. Sarah Game is right to highlight the economic and emotional lifeline that on-farm dams can represent. She is also right to urge a rethink of the system, that too often feels like it was built for an idealised world of regular rainfalls, not for the extremes that climate variability is now delivering.

We have heard the support for this approach from industry groups like the South Australian Dairy Farmers Association, and we have heard it echoed by farmers from the Fleurieu to the Eyre Peninsula. They are not asking for shortcuts: they are asking for sense, for fairness, and for a system that enables them to respond to drought with flexibility and with speed.

Another key issue that has been raised with the opposition relates to the installation of low-flow bypasses. The Flow for Futures program, a joint initiative of the Australian and South Australian governments, has seen bypass devices installed at more than 400 sites across the Eastern Mount Lofty Ranges and Marne Saunders Catchment. Importantly, these installations have always been voluntary and tailored to each individual property, with site-specific solutions developed in partnership with landholders.

It is consistent with Liberal values and principles that the installation of low-flow bypasses must remain voluntary in South Australia. There has been no indication that the board intends to make them compulsory across the Adelaide Hills, but the concern expressed to us is real. Landholders have observed an increasing focus on compliance, particularly regarding illegal dams—many of which have been inherited by new owners without their knowledge. We are also aware of proposals requiring landholders to physically fill in dams deemed noncompliant.

Such heavy-handed approaches undermine trust and fail to recognise that farmers are, by and large, responsible custodians of the land. This motion, therefore, calls on the government to ensure that bypasses remain voluntary and that any farmer choosing to install a bypass must do so at their own expense. Taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidise what many in the community perceive as creeping regulation by stealth. If the government wishes to regulate in this area, then it should have the courage to legislate openly and put the proposal before this parliament.

It is not acceptable for subsidy schemes to become de facto compulsory programs. Indeed, if government generally wishes to encourage uptake, a far better approach would be to provide incentives consistent with Liberal philosophy—such as tax deductibility or instant asset write offs—rather than direct subsidies that erode both transparency and property rights.

Farmers deserve clarity, honesty and choice. Quietly shifting the boundaries of regulation through subsidy programs again risks eroding confidence both in government and in the fairness of the system. We support this motion because it is logical and measured, and because it gives voice to people who are too often drowned out in bureaucratic process. It affirms the principle that in times of drought we must do more than acknowledge hardship—we must remove barriers that prevent resilience.

I commend the mover for putting forward a motion that invites all of us in the chamber to think practically and to support those whose future depends on access to the most basic of resources, that is, water. Let us ensure the rules reflect reality and that policy supports rather than hinders the people who grow our food, care for our land and underpin the prosperity of our regions.

The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (16:15): I rise to speak on the motion moved by the Hon. Ms Sarah Game. I move an amendment to the motion as follows:

Leave out paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6 and insert new paragraphs as follows:

3. Recognises that small dams on farmers' properties contribute to on-farm water management and assist farmers to water their livestock and irrigate their crops;

4. Recognises that regulation of dam construction, modification and removal ensures that on-farm water management needs are appropriately balanced with protection of water catchments, biodiversity and ultimately water security for all;

5. Acknowledges the importance that low flows play in the water flow pattern of a catchment; and

6. Acknowledges that landholders who wish to contribute to the health of their catchment can voluntarily install a low-flow device at their dam, with the support of the Flows for the Future Program, jointly funded by the commonwealth and state governments.

The South Australian government recognises the severity of the drought that continues to affect the state. While most regions have received good rain in July and August, September remained below average in many areas and the 18-month rainfall total across the state still shows severe deficiencies. The warm and windy weather in early October has been detrimental for crops and pastures in regions that have received lower than average rainfall and have no subsoil moisture.

Following the delayed start to the season and rising temperatures, spring rainfall is critical for the outcome of cropping season and recovery of pastures. The government's $73 million package of comprehensive drought assistance continues to support affected farmers and communities across the state. The drought support package was developed in close consultation with industry, primary producers and community representatives. The support has been carefully designed to complement existing support from the commonwealth, which includes concessional loans, income and other financial supports through the Farm Household Allowance, the Farm Management Deposit Scheme and Australian Tax Office measures, such as payment plans, tax deductions and small business tax concessions.

It supports primary industry producers to implement infrastructure projects that assist with managing current drought conditions now and will strengthen their preparedness for future droughts. This scheme provides farmers across the state in all areas affected by drought the opportunity to improve water use efficiency through eligible activities such as pumps, piping, tanks and troughs for livestock and water distribution systems, including desalination plants, leak detection units, irrigation system upgrades, and many more.

Farm dams are an important part of water management for many producers. However, they can alter the timing of water flows throughout a catchment. This impacts the environment that underpins catchment health and supports sustainable agricultural production. Sustainable primary production depends on healthy water catchments. For example, the Eastern Mount Lofty Ranges are a major contributor to South Australia's economy, generating $440 million in agricultural production each year. Rainfall naturally travels through catchments downstream in creeks, streams and rivers, supporting primary producers and the environment as it goes. This natural movement of water has been disrupted by the construction of more than 22,000 dams across the Mount Lofty Ranges, 8,000 of these in the Eastern Mount Lofty Ranges.

While dams are important for primary producers, in large numbers they can also attract feral species and generate overabundant populations of native species, creating a systemic imbalance that is hard to remedy. Farm dam regulation: construction, modification or removal of farm dams and other water-controlling activities require approvals before undertaking works. These activities and others are legislated under the Landscape South Australia Act 2019 (SA), as well as the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016.

The current Landscape Act 2019 was developed after extensive consultation statewide, including primary industry groups, local government and landowners. The South Australian landscape boards administer the water-affecting activity permit process for dam construction and modifications and provide guidance specific to their regions. Authorities that provide approval for dams may recommend timeframes for processing of applications so that producers can plan their works. However, these timelines are not legislated.

Permits for dams are granted through evidence and science-based policy aligned with these acts, such as the water affecting activities control policy of the local landscape boards. Such policies support existing user rights to the extent they can, but not at the expense of water security or natural flows, which support healthy water catchments.

Dams of less than five megalitres' capacity and with a wall height of less than three metres are managed under the Landscape South Australia Act 2019 via the water affecting activity permit. Allowing unregulated construction or modification of dams of this size could directly harm farmers and the broader agricultural sector in South Australia by reducing downstream water availability, increasing evaporation losses and undermining long-term water security.

Unregulated dams or illegal dams can compromise the viability of neighbouring farms, especially during drought, and exacerbate competition within catchments. Low flows can be returned to catchments via a bypass, a device that diverts a small portion of water flow past a dam and into the downstream catchment while medium and high flows continue to fill the dam.

Landholders who wish to contribute to the health of their catchment area can voluntarily install a low-flow device at their dam. A low-flow bypass slightly increases the time it takes to fill a dam. It does not prevent a dam from filling. It has minimal impact on an individual landholder's water security. In fact, a bypass can help increase water security in the catchment by allowing low flows to continue downstream through the watercourse, including to other dams.

Flows for the Future is a program supporting the voluntary installation of low-flow devices. It is delivered under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and is jointly funded by the Australian government and the Government of South Australia. The Flows for the Future program has received positive feedback from landholders who have voluntarily installed low-flow devices, detailing outcomes which include creeks and waterways flowing at times of the year when they would normally be dry, improved condition and increased quantity of vegetation along waterways, and increased presence of animals in waterways.

These are signs of healthy downstream catchments. Healthy downstream catchments have value beyond the small amounts of water diverted through bypass; for example, contributing to natural pest control, pollination and soil health. These are benefits for farm productivity and help reduce input costs. By looking after the health of our catchments, we help ensure current and future landholders have the opportunity to farm viably and be surrounded by healthy and resilient ecosystems that are in the best position to persist in the years to come.

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