Millions of sea creatures dead. Yet nature gets less than 1% of Labor’s South Australian election promises
By Charlotte Nitschke
South Australia’s algal bloom has devastated ecosystems and communities, but with a state election just days away, neither Labor nor the Liberals appear to have learned their lesson, writes Conservation SA’s Charlotte Nitschke.
Pieces like this one are free to read. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber so Cheek can continue paying writers for their insight and expertise.
I want to scream this from the rooftops of South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas’ office: NATURE IS WORTH INVESTING IN! And it will cost you more if you don’t! Nothing boils the blood of a politically engaged young person quite like politicians who ignore global scientific consensus.
In the midst of an ongoing climate-driven toxic algal bloom - the worst environmental catastrophe South Australia has ever seen - nature is forgotten by the major parties, once again. But with millions – likely billions – of sea creatures dead, we desperately need a government that backs nature and not just Big Business.
Conservation SA — South Australia’s peak environment body — asked the major parties to outline their election commitments for nature. The Liberals never responded. Labor replied just eight days before the election — and by our calculations, only 0.2% of their $1.9 billion in commitments goes to nature restoration.
It’s hard to put into words how shockingly abysmal this contribution is. It’s a terrifyingly thickheaded tactic to invest so poorly in something that provides so much. It beguiles logic and boggles the brain – allow me to elaborate.
Firstly, the algal bloom is a warning and a lesson, and it’s one that Labor and the Liberals are continuing to ignore. If governments refuse to invest in nature the way they invest in other essential things that keep us alive — like our health system — taxpayers will inevitably be forced to foot a much higher bill.
Recent research estimates the bloom has caused at least a quarter of a billion dollars in economic losses, not including the vast environmental damage that has yet to be properly quantified and shared with the public.
The cost of acting on our climate and ecological crises today is estimated to be at least six times cheaper than doing nothing. If governments can’t find a way to fund nature (that includes protection, restoration and adaptation), then taxpayers will repeatedly be forced to deal with the very expensive consequences.
A quick note on prevention: earlier this year, the South Australian Government quietly released its very first Statewide Climate Change Risk and Opportunity Assessment 2024, in 2026. Yup, you read those dates right. The risk of algal blooms is mentioned 24 times. There are no excuses for being this unprepared.
Secondly, politicians love popularity, and protecting nature is profoundly popular, according to the polls. Whether or not we enjoy camping, fishing, surfing, diving, bushwalking, caravanning, 4WDing, beach walks, green spaces or cycling, as around 80% of Australians regularly do, our future is inseparably connected to the natural world.
Polling from the Climate Council late last year showed huge majorities wanted better protections for nature, and to factor in the impacts of digging up and burning coal, oil and gas when deciding on nature laws.
Right now, governments are treating nature like an afterthought, rather than the foundation of our lives on Planet Earth. In Labor’s own words, nature accounts for “$70 billion of the state’s economic activity” – not to mention more than half of the world’s GDP, a cool US$58 trillion (A$81.78 trillion).
Lastly, the direct economic impacts of climate-fuelled disasters like SA’s toxic algal bloom are just one of a cascading list of consequences when you don’t invest in nature.
What remains poorly measured (and not transparently reported by the government) are the physical, mental, social and cultural impacts on South Australians: First Nations communities, fishers, divers, snorkellers, swimmers, beachgoers, local residents and coastal businesses.
Consider Enya Chitty, the surfer and coastal scientist I met recently, who described members of her surf community experiencing vomiting and dizziness while out in the water, even when bloom levels were reported as low. Or the mental health impacts. In one study, around 70% of participants reported constant rumination about the bloom, while more than half experienced fear or distress. Some described seeing washed-up marine life as feeling like “the death of a loved one.”
There are also unanswered health questions, including the delayed testing for brevetoxins, explosively revealed on Four Corners last night, which only began months into the bloom, and the non-existent testing of wild-caught shellfish.
It’s worth noting that the current Labor government has begun investing in research and restoration following the bloom. But this investment is a drop in the ocean. Much more is needed, including stronger protections for existing ecosystems.
If Labor or the Liberals truly claim to stand for communities — and not just big business — they need to start funding nature like their lives depend on it.
There’s a state election coming up in South Australia, early voting is open and election day is this Saturday, March 21. It’s time, as we lovingly say in Australian politics, to “keep the bastards honest.”
Building a strong crossbench in the Upper House is one way voters can push the major parties to act. Vote for leaders who understand that there is no future without nature.
About the author
Charlotte Nitschke
Charlotte is the Campaigns Coordinator for South Australia’s peak environment body, Conservation SA. She is a campaigner and changemaker working at the intersection of climate & nature justice — especially our finite and precious water systems — and community power.
Great read, Charlotte! Thank you for your hard work advocating on this issue for all South Australians.