Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 735 ..

MR KAINE (4.22): It seems to me, from what has been said so far, that Ms Horodny should have entitled this debate "No jet skis on Lake Tuggeranong", because that is what it seems to have focused on. However, I am taking her matter of public importance in the broader context, which is what I hope she had in mind when she put it on the agenda. During her remarks at the beginning, Ms Horodny spoke about things like pollution of our water, the things that get washed into it and things like that, which, if taken at face value, would lead me to conclude that she believes that the controls over the quality of water and the quality of our environment in Canberra have somehow failed. I do not believe that for a minute.

Mr Humphries made the point that we are a 300,000-odd community inland city and the pollution that we pass on to people downstream, down the river system and the like, is absolutely minimal. Once or twice a year, perhaps, the system breaks down for one reason or another, but it is very quickly rectified. It is absurd to suggest that our environment is being destroyed or even seriously degraded because of lack of control. In fact, within the broad strategy of this Government, there is in place a very wide range of very specific initiatives aimed at ensuring the protection of our waterways, and they are not entirely the product of this Government. This Government has been in power for only a year. These things are a product of a series of governments over a long period. I would have thought that Mr Wood, for example, might have claimed credit for some parts of the infrastructure that is in place to protect our environment and our waterways, and they are very effective, in my view, in doing it.

Let us look, for example, at stormwater controls. Ms Horodny does not want to listen. She is critical, but she does not want to listen to what the true situation is. Canberra has, in fact, a well-developed system of urban lakes, ponds, gross pollutant traps and floodways specifically designed to intercept and retain pollutants which are transported into our stormwater run-off system. About 80 per cent of the ACT urban area is protected by these stormwater controls, and new urban lakes and ponds are established before any new land development begins. How you could argue, then, that the Government is somehow remiss in not preventing these pollutants from getting into the main waterways of Australia is beyond me.

The major point source discharges into our waterways system are regulated by licence, and detailed compliance is required for a wide range of different substances that might find their way into the system. The most significant waste discharge licence issued is for the major sewage treatment in the ACT, the Lower Molonglo Water Quality Control Centre, which ensures a very high level of effluent control. Indeed, there is nothing like it anywhere else in Australia. The Government runs an inspectorial service which works with business and the general community specifically to identify ways to prevent harmful chemicals like fertilisers and heavy metals from entering the stormwater system.

Ms Horodny made some comment about blue-green algae. The ACT algal action plan documents the actions that the Government is taking to minimise and to manage blue-green algal blooms in the ACT. The plan also stresses the importance of community action to minimise pollution which may lead to algal blooms. The Government can do what it likes, but if 300,000 people choose to wash all their waste down the stormwater system it cannot stop them. It can only try to educate people and try to control it.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .