HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-09-09 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE: GOOLWA CHANNEL WATER LEVEL MANAGEMENT

Ms CICCARELLO (Norwood) (11:37): I move:

That the 327th report of the committee, entitled Goolwa Channel Water Level Management, be noted.

This project involves a temporary environmental flow regulator in the Goolwa Channel at Clayton in conjunction with a low-level regulator in the mouths of each of the Finniss River and Currency Creek. These regulators will enable water levels to be raised and managed to re-submerge sediments, start a bioremediation process, and limit ecological damage and water quality impairment. Vegetation establishment and lime dosing facilities are also to be put in place to augment bioremediation.

The committee was advised that the water level in the Goolwa Channel will be raised by pumping from Lake Alexandrina and it will then be maintained between plus 0.7 metre AHD and 0.0 metre AHD by natural winter inflows from Currency Creek and Finniss River. Extremely low flows over the past three years have led to water levels in the weir pool downstream of Lock 1 falling to below sea level for the first time on record. The committee accepted that the water levels in Lake Alexandrina and the Goolwa Channel required an emergency response to manage the threat of acidification.

In the tributaries and the Goolwa Channel very large areas of acid sulphate sediments were exposed and actively acidifying. Currency Creek was completely dry and heavily acidified and large quantities of heavy metals and other metalloids were already present in the soil surface.

The committee was told that the Finniss River was drying rapidly, its remaining water was extremely high in salinity and acid generation well advanced. The combination of a regulator at Clayton and low-level regulators at the Finniss River and Clayton Creek will allow greater control and flexibility over the management of acid sulphate soils in the area. The low-level regulators will be temporary structures and will be removed after drought recovery.

It needs to be noted that recovery will be needed for the entire river, not just a local river. The trigger for removal of the regulators will be the level of storage in the Hume and Dartmouth dams, and this level of recovery is not anticipated in one season. The objectives of the flow regulator in the Goolwa channel are to:

maintain water levels by initially pumping fresh water from Lake Alexandrina into the new pool and then partially capturing seasonal flows from the Finniss River and Currency Creek;

mitigate the acidification of the Goolwa Channel, Finniss River and Currency Creek by raising and maintaining their water levels;

provide a freshwater refuge to mitigate the effects of low water levels on the ecology as a result of the current drought;

prepare to conduct calcium carbonate dosing to reduce acidity in the tributary streams; and

maximise the natural bioremediation process to reduce acidification.

Incidentally, this project is intended to provide some relief to the boating and tourism industries in the Goolwa area through raised water levels in the channel and improved water quality. I noted Mayor Kym McHugh saying that already things had improved down there with regard to the boating activity in the area.

The low-level regulators will enable control saturation of the extensive acid sulphate sediments in the tributaries and will also enable early-season tributary flows to be ponded above the regulators, providing for in situ bioremediation to take place. The strategy with the two structures in the tributaries is to pool early-season flows long enough for natural bioremediation to occur. This will reduce the loads of acid and heavy metals naturally before spilling into the Goolwa Channel, which by that stage will almost be a chain of ponds easily overwhelmed by any acid and metals that flowed in from the tributaries.

If acidification goes beyond the tipping point, the problem will be very difficult to reverse and will require decades of management. In the absence of intervention, the deterioration of freshwater habitats in the lakes may lead to the local extinction of freshwater species such as the Murray Hardyhead and Yarra Pygmy Perch. The Lower Lakes are a stronghold of the species, and loss from the lakes would greatly increase the chances of extinction.

A temporary structure will restrict navigation by boats and fish, and the waters of Lake Alexandrina north of Hindmarsh Island will no longer be accessible from the Goolwa Channel. However, continued falling water levels in the Lower Lakes will result in the Goolwa Channel commencing to be disconnected from Lake Alexandrina in late October 2009, thereby preventing boat access.

The committee is aware of the low level of water in the Lower Lakes and the threat of soil acidification once submerged soils are exposed. Consequently, the committee was concerned to ensure that taking 30 gigalitres of water from the Lower Lakes to reduce soil and acidification in the Goolwa Channel will not accelerate the need to make critical decisions about the Lower Lakes. The committee was assured that this project will not affect the timing of decisions relating to the Lower Lakes.

We feel that this project is justified on the basis of averting a large-scale ecological catastrophe. Based upon the evidence it has considered and pursuant to section 12C of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991, the Public Works Committee reports to parliament that it recommends the proposed public works.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (11:43): The whole subject of the Murray has been most difficult and has caused great divisions within communities up and down the length of the river, particularly in South Australia, where it has been a source of great angst. That has been added to by the so-called Clayton regulator, which is the subject we are talking about today. This side of the house supported that regulator in the Public Works Committee, and it seems a bit of a case of déjà vu, because all those months ago we talked about this, when it came to the Public Works Committee, and it seems like ancient history now that it has actually been built and come to fruition.

In her report, the member for Norwood touched on a number of details, but perhaps I should touch on why we are at this stage in the first place. It really is a result of inaction by the Rann Labor government in providing freshwater flows down the Murray and keeping those lakes in some semblance of order. The fact that we have arrived at a situation where there is no water down there and that we have had to put in a regulator is, of course, of great concern to myself and members on this side of the house and, I am sure, to many members of the wider South Australian community.

Indeed, it caused tremendous division down on the western side of Lake Alexandrina. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to understand, from the press reports—whether it be on the television, radio or in metropolitan or country papers—that it is still causing division and there is still a great deal of angst.

Having said that, I have nothing but absolute contempt for those who have attempted to railroad their own particular philosophy through the public arena. I find it absolutely outrageous and disgraceful that a former premier, Dean Brown, had a bucket of mud thrown on him down there a few weeks ago. I know that no member of this house would support that. I found that quite disgusting, and it reflects badly on that group of people—many of whom are good people—who opposed the regulator cum dam, call it what you may, at Clayton. Unfortunately, my view is that it was quite a premeditated act. From the information I have received since that day, it was quite obvious that a number of people walked out shortly before that happened. As I said, I find it disgraceful that a former premier of this state—or anyone for that matter—had that inflicted upon them. That really does their cause no good whatsoever.

However, there are some very good people who remain opposed to that regulator, people like Henry and Gloria Jones, for whom I have the utmost respect. Henry has been fishing there for decades and knows the area inside out. I find it interesting that Mayor McHugh was quoted, because there was also a fair bit of dissension within the Goolwa community about the action, or lack of action, from the Alexandrina Council. I think they have been in a difficult position and floundering somewhat as to where to go on this. I know from people who have businesses down around the river and the Goolwa Channel—whether they be marine businesses, tourism accommodation or any other sort of business—that a buzz has gone back into Goolwa that I have not seen for a long time. The fact that the water levels are quite significant and still rising has certainly put some life back into that area.

As a matter of fact, I called for a one-off tourism promotion program for the Goolwa area only a week or two ago through the Rann Labor government and the South Australian Tourism Commission. I think it is critical. Indeed, a program was put in place after the December 2007 fires on Kangaroo Island. That got the island's tourism business, and everybody else, back and running, and I think this message needs to go out for Goolwa.

It does not matter much whether you are at Renmark or at the bottom end of Goolwa; the perception in the wider community is that there is no water in the river. That is an absolute nonsense, because up behind Lock 1, and the rest of the way up, there is basically a series of dams, and there is water there. Businesses are operating and they are encouraging visitors. It is absolutely critical that we continue to pursue that.

It is interesting that substantial problems occurred with the construction of the regulator. I will be interested to see just what it cost in the final analysis, because the dirt, rocks and whatnot continued to go down into the Murray, because that could be a taste of what might happen if they actually ever decide to build a weir at Wellington, which I remain opposed to. I remain adamantly opposed to letting sea water into Lake Alexandrina. That is not the answer. That is a fight for another day. I am sure that my colleague the member for Hammond, and others on this side, still feel the same way about that.

Overall, my view is that, if we are able to save that little bit—which is only a minuscule piece of the river in the Goolwa Channel—and keep some normality down there and also keep a freshwater option with the introduction of water from the Finniss River and Currency Creek, that is in the long-term best interests of that minuscule section of the river for the community, the environment, and a host of other reasons.

I reiterate that I am well aware of the dissent of other members of the community along the lakes and the river north of Clayton dam. So, we will watch this with interest. We all hope that there will be a return to normal seasons, and we also hope that, one of these days, the Premier may just decide to go down there and have a look for himself and take a few of his colleagues with him.

You do not need to fly over that area at 2,000 feet; you need to get down there and talk to the people. The member for Hammond and I, in particular, have attended numerous public meetings. I have attended meetings in my electorate, but the member for Hammond has attended, in his own time, a huge number of meetings from the Murray Mouth up to the South Australian border and beyond. He has done an enormous amount of work, and I commend him for it. He has a good grip of the situation along the length and breadth of the river, and I applaud him for that.

However, the subject at hand today is the regulator and the way in which the Public Works Committee dealt with that. It was an interesting and well researched process that led us to approving that. I indicate that I support the report. However, I reiterate that there are enormous divisions within the communities on the river that do not have water and do not look like having water for some substantial time.

It is a tragedy that is still unfolding, and it will continue to unfold. It is a tragedy that is largely the result of mismanagement by mankind, whether it be federal or state governments or a combination of both—or greed; call it what you may. We should never have ended up in the position we are now in. Obviously, we cannot put the drought to one side, but mismanagement has been to the fore. I think it is a sad day for Australia when we find ourselves in the dreadful position where the food basket of south-eastern Australia is in such a diabolical mess.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (11:52): I think it is fair to say that, being the representative of the seat of Unley, we get only half the story about the failure of state governments and the federal government to manage the Murray. We see what is happening at Clayton, Goolwa and the lakes district, where there has been years of neglect and dispute over water ownership, issues which have been ignored and not dealt with by state governments.

I also think that for it to get to this stage illustrates that this is after nearly eight years of the Rann government. I refer to a press release put out by Mike Rann on 18 June 2002 when he was visiting the UK, of all places, where he was launching a website 'to keep the public up to speed on the Rann government's actions'. I will read into Hansard one of the things he lists. It is a quote, supposedly from the Premier. He says:

The site lists decisions taken by the government since the election, including the plan to secure Mitsubishi's future in South Australia—

although I am not sure that is still on the website—

and the agreement on the River Murray with Victoria—

Something else that was listed as an achievement by the Rann government in its first 100 days. So, the website indicates a plan to secure the future of Mitsubishi and an agreement on the River Murray with Victoria. I do not know whether or not it was an historic agreement; it does not mention that in the press release. Now, of course, nearly eight years later, we see that the Premier is taking Victoria to the High Court over the agreement.

The Hon. R.B. Such: Threatening to.

Mr PISONI: Threatening to. So, we will see what happens after the election. We can see that this is part of the Mike Rann election manual. We see him making announcements from overseas, looking very important and rubbing shoulders with important people. On this very same trip, a press release came out the next day in which he boasts about meeting English movie directors—and all these movie directors were going to visit South Australia but, of course, they never did. What happened last week? Was it Arnold Schwarzenegger? That's right—he was going to visit South Australia.

The Hon. R.B. Such: 'I'll be back!'

Mr PISONI: 'I'll be back!' That will be interesting. Of course, that is part of the Hawker Britton formula, and I acknowledge the Attorney-General showing some great interest—a very good campaigner, I must say—in understanding how the Hawker Britton model works: attaching yourself to famous people, making yourself look a lot more important than you actually are and grabbing hold of the success of other people and trying to claim it as your own. It is all there in the manual that Mike Rann pulls out at every election.

I think the important thing that was raised by the member for Finniss is that we do need to understand that the river is still a great recreational activity for tourism, and I can speak from experience. My two children, who are passionate rowers, have both just returned from the Unley High School spring rowing camp. They were at Walker's Flat, which is below Lock 1. Although it was lower than in previous years, it was still a great four days for them—hard training both on and off the water. I do recommend that people get up there and visit the river and enjoy the facilities that the river offers.

I must point out, as a member of the opposition, the disappointment that we have seen in the state government's management of the River Murray. The Premier of this state was the federal president of the ALP, but even that was not enough to secure an agreement for more water for the River Murray, and we all know that, when a river dies, it dies from its mouth.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:57): I will just make a brief contribution. Ultimately, what will save the river is substantial and sustained rainfall in the catchment area of the Murray-Darling system. I have recently been down there and I stayed at Goolwa and had a look at what was being done at Clayton and what is being also undertaken on the Finniss River and Currency Creek. Whether those mechanisms will work, I do not know. I guess it is a form of insurance. I hope they do work.

I would, however, follow up on the point just made by the member for Unley that people in Adelaide should not stop visiting these areas because there is a perception that there is no water at all in the whole Murray system. There is water. It is a bit illusory because it is held back by the locks—we know that. People should get out and visit these areas. We have some fantastic places in South Australia, down on the Fleurieu with towns like Goolwa and their wonderful history, and up in the Riverland. Many of those people are doing it tough because of the water supply.

However, we should not forget that, across the border in Victoria in areas like Merbein and Mildura, the people are doing it tough as well. I have seen where they have ripped out orchards of pistachios and oranges and so on because there is just not enough water to go around, and then you go into New South Wales and they say, 'What water shortage? We've got plenty of water.'

There is obviously something wrong in terms of the management of the river traditionally and historically which has resulted in and compounded the problem of the drought, and the fact that the water has not been able to get down to the lower reaches of the Murray. It is still a fantastic area and I think people should not avoid these places. There is fantastic local produce and fantastic things still happening whether you go to Newman's horseradish farm or other things—there are so many things down there. The produce is better than a lot of the stuff we import.

Importantly, in the long term, I think only rain will save the Murray and it is critical in terms of food security. We are currently importing half our fish, or close to it, and half our dried fruit, and that is an unfortunate and sad commentary on the way the situation has evolved. I hope the measures taken at Clayton and elsewhere work, but the answer is that only time will tell. I commend the report to the house.

Ms CICCARELLO (Norwood) (12:00): I thank other members for their comments, and would like to reiterate what was said by the member for Finniss, that there is a lot of disagreement about what is the appropriate situation down there. Even experts from the university disagree about what is the best situation, whether it should be fresh or salt water in the Lower Lakes. Interestingly, a group of about 30 international experts are visiting the Lower Lakes today to look at the river system. Obviously water is a crisis around the world, and if we cannot manage a river system in one country they want to see how they will manage river systems in the different countries they travel through overseas. It is a vexed question.

It was also interesting to see, in this morning's paper, that there is now a lot of run-off flowing into the Murray, and we are hoping that the seasons will change and we will get more life in the river. With that, I commend the report to the house.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT