HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2016-03-09 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Local Government (Stormwater Management Agreement) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 10 February 2016.)

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (11:02): I rise on behalf of the opposition to speak to the Local Government (Stormwater Management Agreement) Amendment Bill 2015. The bill implements the state and local governments' Stormwater Management Agreement of 2013. The Local Government Association entered into a memorandum of agreement on stormwater management on 14March 2006. Things move slowly: the MOU is from 2006 and now, 10 years later in March 2010, we have this bill before us.

The agreement sets out the first responsibilities for stormwater management, addressing responsibilities for stormwater management and providing the basis for joint collaboration by both levels of government to deal with the threat of flooding and to better manage the use of stormwater as a resource. As part of the agreement, the government provided $4 million per annum, indexed over 30 years, and the Local Government Act 1999 was amended in 2007 to represent this commitment.

In 2011, the government released the stormwater strategy entitled 'The future of stormwater management'. One of the key recommendations arising from the strategy was to establish a new operational model for the authority by giving it a more strategic outlook. This was the basis on which the state and the Local Government Association entered into the Stormwater Management Agreement in 2013. These agreements require the authority to develop a 10-year strategic plan.

The first plan was released in December 2015, with business plans to be prepared every three years. They include refinements to the governance and the operation of the authority, including the composition and the procedures of the authority. This includes an emphasis on members' skills as a primary consideration, while retaining an equal number of local government-nominated and state government-nominated members.

I do remember that the Hon. Nick Bolkus, Labor senator, was on one of the early stormwater authorities. It is interesting that it mentions an emphasis on the members' skills as a primary consideration. I am not sure of his skills in stormwater management when he was on that authority; however, I believe he is no longer there. This change also means that members nominated by local government no longer need to be representative of a particular geographic area. According to the government, this change will ease pressures as many areas struggle to nominate a suitable member. However, this change will potentially result in no regional representation on the authority.

Members will note that the opposition has already filed a couple of amendments to the bill in consultation with the LGA. We want to ensure that at least one local government representative is on the authority and that that person will be nominated by the LGA and have qualifications or experience to represent the interests of a region of local government. So I clarify that this appointment would be based on qualifications and experience and not on employment status, and the appropriateness of those qualifications and experience would be determined by the LGA and be made publicly available. Members would be aware that I have an amendment that has been filed in my name to that effect.

I will not prolong the debate any further. We support the bill. We support the establishment of this stormwater management agreement, but I would very much like to encourage members to support the amendment when we get to the committee stage of the bill.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (11:05): If there are no further contributions, I would like to thank honourable members for their contributions and their indications of support and look forward to the timely passage of this legislation.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clauses 1 to 3 passed.

Clause 4.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: I move:

Amendment No 1 [Ridgway–1]—

Page 7, lines 5 to 7 [clause 4, inserted clause 7(3)]—Delete '(and the qualifications or experience of appointed members of the board must be made publicly available in a manner determined by the board)'

Amendment No 2 [Ridgway–1]—

Page 7, after line 7 [clause 4, inserted clause 7]—After subclause (3) insert:

(3a) At least 1 of the members appointed on the nomination of the LGA must be a person who, in the opinion of the LGA, has appropriate qualifications or experience to represent the interests of regional local government.

(3b) The qualifications or experience of appointed members of the board must be made publicly available in a manner determined by the board.

As I indicated in my reasonably brief second reading contribution, the opposition is moving these two amendments to have at least one LGA person be appointed to the authority. Members would know I live in the Mitcham council. There has been a significant amount of debate around stormwater mitigation in that council area, around Brownhill Creek and the dam, with the 'no dam' people and the widening of the creek.

That particular creek flows down into the City of West Torrens. There has been huge interaction with local government since 2006 when the agreement between local government and state government was signed. From our point of view, it makes sense to have at least one person from the LGA, nominated by the LGA, to sit on that authority. It just does not make any sense at all, given the local floodwater and stormwater management agreement between local government and state government, that there is potential for nobody from local government to be on there. It just does not make sense to us and we strongly urge members to support the amendment.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: The arrangements for the nomination of members for the board of the Stormwater Management Authority as detailed in clause 7 of the bill were driven, I am advised, by the Local Government Association to ensure that the Stormwater Management Authority has skills-based membership and not be constrained by geographic representation. That was driven by the LGA. Members of the council should note that the Stormwater Management Authority will continue to have a statewide focus regardless of the amendment that has been proposed by the Leader of the Opposition.

As part of its strategic plan, a key aspect of this legislation is that the Stormwater Management Authority has identified a number of priority catchments across the state that it will be directing its efforts towards over the next three years. Of the nine high-priority catchments identified, three are in regional South Australia, with these being, I am advised, in Clare, Renmark and Port Augusta.

The Stormwater Management Authority's listing of priority catchments is available, I am told, from the Local Government Association's website. I am advised that the Stormwater Management Authority has already started contacting the relevant councils to initiate work on stormwater management plans for these areas.

For these reasons, I think the amendment proposed by the Hon. David Ridgway is probably unnecessary given the way the LGA has to behave anyway. Given its functions and the way it is made up, I would be very surprised if a variety of interests are not represented in their nomination process. I take the point: the honourable member says there is the potential that nobody from a regional area could be nominated, but I think that would be highly unlikely. Nonetheless, whilst I think it is not ideal, I have no real problems with the amendments. I do not think it does any work whatsoever and therefore will not cause us any problems.

Amendments carried; clause as amended passed.

Title.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: Can the minister explain to us what the remuneration will be for the chair and the members of the authority?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: My advice is that we are not proposing any change to the current remuneration, but I am just checking with my adviser to see if we have that information at hand right now.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: While the adviser is looking for that information, will all the members of the authority be required to have expertise and understanding in stormwater management or will it only be the members and you will have an independent chair who may not have that expertise?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: My advice is that we are moving to a skills-based board. A number of skills and experience will be required for the proper administration of the board, and they will be set out by the board at some stage. Again, there is not a great deal of difference, except that we are moving away from a representational structure to a skills-based one. What are those skill sets, and does every member need to have exactly the same set of skills? Probably not.

Some skill sets will need to be administrative, some will need to be in stormwater, some will need to be in local government, for example, but it will be a skills-based board rather than a representational one. Rather than waste the council's time, I might take that question on notice and bring back the remuneration schedule for the honourable member.

Title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (11:12): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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