HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-06-24 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Community Wastewater Management System

Mr BOYER (Wright) (15:31): I rise today to speak about the Community Wastewater Management System forum I attended on the weekend, on Saturday 19 June, at the Tea Tree Gully RSL. This forum was hosted by the Deputy Mayor of Tea Tree Gully, Mr Lucas Jones, and co-hosted by Councillor Jessica Lintvelt, who is a councillor for the Steventon Ward. Over 100 residents attended the forum, which I am sure people in here will acknowledge is a very considerable number of residents to turn out on any issue.

But on what was a Saturday, and obviously not necessarily particularly convenient for all people, to get 100 concerned local residents to come and listen to the comments from Councillor Jones and Councillor Lintvelt, but then also to ask questions of the SA Water experts I will say, who were there in attendance as well, shows the high level of both interest and concern in this issue in the north-eastern suburbs.

It will come as no surprise to people that real concerns were raised by those residents about a number of key factors, particularly around the Marshall Liberal government's plan to transition all those residents who are in properties still using a septic tank system onto a more modern system, especially given the time line for getting that work done and any potential costs that may be brought to bear upon the resident.

Members of this place might recall that in around June of last year this government rushed out an announcement that they would spend $65 million on working with SA Water and the Tea Tree Gully council to upgrade the CWMS. That came just after Labor's announcement of $92 million to connect 4,700 properties in the Tea Tree Gully council area to the SA Water mains network. The key tenet of Labor's announcement, the $92 million commitment as opposed to the $65 million commitment, was that there would be no cost under Labor's plan to the householder.

The $65 million commitment by the Marshall Liberal government obviously falls quite short of the $92 million that Labor had set aside to fully fund the transition of those 4,700 homes, and we based our commitment on data provided to us by the government, by SA Water and by the Tea Tree Gully council too. We looked at how many properties there were in total that needed to be transitioned. We had a look at what the range of costs might be, in terms of each property being transitioned off a septic tank.

Unfortunately, one of the great complexities of this issue in the north-east is that no two properties are the same. You can walk along a single street in which there are multiple properties that are still on septic tanks and one might have the septic tank in the front of the property and another might have the septic tank in the back of the property. We were informed that a rough guide in terms of the cost of transitioning those properties would be, at the low end where it was easy, about $2,000, I believe, and at the high end, where it was more complex, around $12,000 or $13,000.

We took an average of $10,000 and that is how we came to the figure of $92 million. We believe that will be enough to make sure that those 4,700 properties are transitioned without any cost to the ratepayer. Unfortunately, the significant and most pronounced area of concern for those residents who came along on Saturday was that under the Liberal's $65 million plan, particularly those people who fall into stage 3—that is, they may have their property transitioned between 2024 and 2028—who is going to pay the extra $30 million or so to make sure that that stage becomes funded.

They were led to believe, when the Liberal government made its commitment, that there would not be any cost to them, but it is becoming apparent now that there will be a cost somewhere for them.

Dr Harvey: There won't be. There won't be any cost to them.

Mr BOYER: The member for Newland interjects and says that there won't be a cost to them, but I ask: if the council is asked to put in the $30 million, which is the gap between the two, where does that come from? It sounds all well and good. Hypothetically, the council is asked to contribute something towards this; after all, they do own the system, that is true, but of course the fact is that if council cannot afford the money where is it coming from? It will be the ratepayers, or more likely, because of a commitment or a determination from ESCOSA, it will have to be those people still on the system, which means a higher cost for a smaller number of people.

The message is loud and clear. People here have waited long enough. They deserve to be transitioned at no cost now. It deserves to be done properly. Only Labor has—

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Members interjecting:

Mr BOYER: Who's on Unley watch today? Is someone minding him?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Wright, have you finished your contribution?

Mr BOYER: No.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am going to give you a few extra seconds to wrap up, please.

Mr BOYER: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for your protection. People in the north-eastern suburbs, the 4,700 property owners who are still on septic tanks, have waited long enough. They have waited decades and decades here.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Point of order, sir: the time has finished.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Except, member for Unley, there were interjections that caused the member for Wright not to be able to fill his allocated five minutes. I am going to give you just 15 seconds, member for Wright, to wrap that up.

Mr BOYER: They know the plan is a dud. That is why they are so upset. The people of the north-east deserve this to be done properly. Only Labor has a fully funded plan. Only Labor will make sure the transition happens without cost to the ratepayer.

Time expired.

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