HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-02-24 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Site Contamination, Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (14:32): My questions are to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation in relation to the review of Clovelly and Mitchell Park contamination. What additional resources have been allocated to identify and audit the estimated 4,000 contaminated sites across the state? Why wasn't the review conducted by an independent assessor rather than the EPA itself? Where is the public apology to the residents of Clovelly Park and Mitchell Park for the government's appalling mishandling of this crisis, and is this what the minister was referring to when he told estimates last year that we need a new engagement paradigm?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (14:33): I thank the honourable member for her most important questions and for giving me the opportunity again to advise the chamber about the government's proactive changes in relation to the EPA's handling of site contamination, arising of course from the Clovelly Park incident, for which I have already apologised on behalf of the government, for the way that we have traditionally handled passing on information to the public, and we now have an opportunity to talk about the way forward.

The government and the EPA have learned from this incident and have changed our procedures accordingly. As the honourable member knows, the inquiry was chaired by Ms Cheryl Batagol, the chair of the Victorian EPA. It included three EPA board members and three senior state government executives.

The review used the Clovelly Park site as a case study to capture learnings and ensure continuous improvement in the management of site contamination. It assessed the effectiveness of the system currently in place and, as I acknowledged, the failings of it, and has made recommendations for reform that include protocols and practices to reflect the community's changing expectation about the communication of site contamination matters.

The board review committee concluded that legacy site contamination in South Australia is generally well managed, but there are opportunities to improve, particularly in relation to interagency coordination and capability, as identified in my ministerial statement. The report identifies 11 recommendations under five categories. I covered that in the ministerial statement as well. The EPA is already working to implement recommendations relevant to its processes through the establishment of an executive level steering group.

Other recommendations relating to cross-government policy will require coordination by the EPA. The chief executive of the EPA will establish a working group to coordinate the implementation of these recommendations, as I said. The principal role of the EPA is to ensure that responsible parties meet their obligations under the act.

The Environment Protection Act 1993 adopts the polluter pays principle, which means that where possible the party which causes the contamination is responsible for the assessment, management, containment and clean-up of the site. The challenge posed by legacy site contamination is complex and requires a holistic response from the government. It is a challenge being faced right around the nation, as I said, and indeed across the world.

As improvements in techniques and the understanding of toxicology advance, and our ability to mitigate such site contamination constantly improves, so too must our policies change and evolve, taking into consideration those changes. As I said, I welcome the committee's review. I thank Ms Batagol and the committee for their work, which will contribute to the future management of legacy site contamination in South Australia and other jurisdictions in the country. I know the EPAs from interstate have been watching this situation very closely for how it might impact on their own functions in carrying out their act obligations. The world is changing around us, and the EPA and government must act according to the desires and wishes of the community in which we serve.

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