Energy Resources (Regulated Activities) Amendment Bill

Mr FATCHEN (Mount Gambier) (17:22): I would like to make a small contribution. I rise to speak in strong opposition to any move to lift the fracking moratorium in the Limestone Coast. This issue is not just about gas exploration. It is about trust, water security, regional industries and the future of our community. The Limestone Coast community has made its position overwhelmingly clear. There is no social licence for unconventional gas development in our region.

Over recent weeks, hundreds of residents have attended community meetings and forums, voicing their deep concerns about the risks posed to our underground water systems, productive farmland and the industry that underpins our economy, and they have every right to be concerned. The Limestone Coast contributes more than $5 billion annually to the South Australian economy and produces over 30 per cent of the state's agricultural exports from just a small portion of the state's land mass.

Our region's success is built on clean water, premium agriculture, forestry, viticulture and food production. Water is not simply another resource in the Limestone Coast; it is the lifeblood of our economy and our way of life. That is why the government's own wording in its press release should alarm every regional South Australian. The lease states that fracking is being considered because 'South Australia and the broader east coast face increasing pressure on domestic gas supply.'

I make this point very clear: the Eastern States have a far greater population than South Australia, yet we have Tasmania, Victoria and areas of New South Wales and Queensland moving away from fracking and unconventional gas development. Why should the Limestone Coast be expected to take the risk? Why should our region place our water resources, farmland and agricultural reputation on the line to solve energy pressures elsewhere?

The government's release also states that unconventional gas development is 'unlikely to pose significant risks to groundwater'. 'Unlikely' is not good enough, not when our aquifer sustains entire industries, not when family farms and businesses depend on clean underground water, and not when the long-term reputation of our premium food and wine industry is at stake.

The people of Limestone Coast do not want vague reassurances or carefully worded press releases. They want certainty. They want their water protected and they want their voices genuinely heard before decisions are made, not after legislation is introduced. The community also feels deeply betrayed. The Premier previously assured the Limestone Coast community that the moratorium would remain in place. Now the government is seeking to overturn it early. That promise mattered to people. It gave communities confidence that their concerns had been listened to and respected. Instead, many residents now feel blindsided.

The original moratorium, secured through strong advocacy for the Limestone Coast, recognised the unique environmental and economic importance to our region. Those concerns have not disappeared. If anything, they has become even more important as our agriculture and food production industries continue to grow. While the government may argue that this is inevitable in two years' time, a lot can happen in two years. The government has stated that the science has changed over the last eight years while the moratorium has been in place. What is to say the science will not change again in the next two years to say that it is not safe?

I will continue standing with the Limestone Coast community in opposing any attempt to lift this moratorium because it only takes one mistake to compromise our water, and then there is no turning back. No short-term energy policy is worth risking the industries, environment and livelihoods that generations of Limestone Coast families have built.