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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 739 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

There is a further series of conclusions. I think it is even more important than reports from the Commissioner for the Environment - that report will be examined in detail by the Planning and Environment Committee, as was announced at our previous sitting - that we look at ideas and recommendations for further action from the Commissioner for the Environment provided on page 70. I will list, first of all, the headings of those. They are trade waste legislation, ground water monitoring, protection of ground water and remediation of contaminated ground water, pest species, riparian vegetation, water quantity management and water quality management. They are the fundamental issues about which we can do something concrete. It is not as though we are working in some vacuum and saying, "What actions do we now take to protect and enhance our city's waterways?". Some actions have been suggested and some guidance has been provided by the Commissioner for the Environment, which the Planning and Environment Committee of this Assembly will now be assessing to see just how the Government's response goes and what effort the Government is putting into responding on these issues, or, if you like, to ensure that the Government does respond to the suggestions. These practices have been in place, Mr Speaker, and will continue to be in place.

We look at trade waste legislation covering toxic materials, including waste from research and education laboratories, that are discharged into the sewer. There are things that we have to monitor and double-check. Ground water monitoring is particularly important now that we have looked at how we monitor contaminated sites, and how the contaminated sites might go into ground water. The Commissioner for the Environment mentions sheep dips. There is also contamination of places like Kingston, which is now so close to our waterways. Although a lot of that contamination may well have occurred before the lake was filled, it is still a matter of concern.

Protection of ground water and remediation of contaminated ground water are also important issues, and programs need to be established to deal with this problem. The challenge is there in front of us. The Commissioner for the Environment challenges us to improve our capacity to assess and respond quickly to the introduction of pest plants and animal species into ACT bodies of water. Most of us already are aware of the major devastation caused by the introduction of carp into Australian waterways. There are other examples, not to mention pest species in terms of plants. In some ways, that integrates with the commissioner's next point about riparian vegetation on the edges of rivers and waterways. We may talk, for example, of basic plants such as willows and so forth that fit into that category. We know that work has been done in conjunction with the community along Ginninderra Creek, and important work it is.

Mr Speaker, we then talk about water quantity management and water quality management. Those issues cover not just the quantity of water that we use for domestic purposes but also the amount of ground water that is used. These are important issues in terms of whether we establish new dams or whether we can maintain our living standards with the water capacity that we have currently. I must say, Mr Speaker, that I often wonder about the kinds of issues that are raised. I believe that throughout a number of drought periods the lowest we have ever gone is about 85 per cent of capacity in our reservoirs. I believe that the Cotter, which Ms Horodny mentioned, has not been used as a back-up dam for something like the last 20 years, or maybe even longer, because we need to pump that water rather than to allow gravity feed.

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