Report: Select Committee on PFAS Contamination in Waterways and Drinking Water Supplies Throughout NSW
I table report No. 1 of the select committee, entitled PFAS contamination in waterways and drinking water supplies throughout New South Wales, dated September 2025, together with transcripts of evidence, tabled documents, submissions, correspondence and answers to questions taken on notice and supplementary questions.
As chair of the Select Committee on PFAS Contamination in Waterways and Drinking Water Supplies Throughout New South Wales I take note of the report. The inquiry was established after Sydney Morning Herald investigative reporter Carrie Fellner, working with Professor Ian Wright from the University of Western Sydney, revealed that elevated levels of PFAS "forever chemicals" had been detected in parts of Sydney's drinking water. Around the same time, alarmingly high levels of PFAS had been detected in foam in the Belubula River in the State's Central West—this time with Professor Ian Wright working with representatives from the Cadia Community Sustainability Network. PFAS had also been found in the bodies of dead platypus by one of Professor Wright's PhD students working on a research project.
The public should be able to trust that our drinking water is safe, and our waterways are free from toxic pollutants, but each of these incidents only came to light because of the work of independent scientists, journalists and impacted communities. Once the committee began its work, it soon became apparent that New South Wales government agencies tasked with protecting public health and water quality had not kept pace with the spread of PFAS chemicals throughout the environment. It was really clear that everybody in fact was frantically trying to catch up. Indeed, that has been the case with government agencies around the world. From the outset, one of the challenges the committee experienced was the paucity of data in New South Wales about where and how PFAS chemicals might be entering the State's waterways. Another was the rapidly evolving nature of the science.
For example, during the course of the inquiry the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines were revised to reduce the levels of the most prominent PFAS chemicals. The International Agency for Research on Cancer released its 745-page monograph supporting its finding that PFOA was carcinogenic. Our inquiry received invaluable evidence from a range of stakeholders, including scientists and academics, local councils, industry stakeholders and, of course, members of local communities directly affected by PFAS contamination in the Blue Mountains, Williamtown, the Central West of New South Wales and Wagga Wagga. In addition, the committee had the privilege of hearing from international witnesses including Minnesota state Senator Judy Seeberger, Avonna Starck from Minnesota Clean Water Action and academics from the University of Southern California. I place on record how grateful the committee was that they made themselves available. Throughout the inquiry one message we heard loud and clear from witnesses—especially water utilities and local councils—was the urgent need to stop PFAS chemicals at the source.
Unfortunately, the scale of what is required to clean up PFAS chemicals—in wastewater particularly—is already herculean, but it will only become more so if nothing is done to prevent PFAS chemicals entering drains and waterways in the first place. That is because PFAS is used in countless everyday products. From non-stick cookware to make-up and sunscreen, pizza boxes, plastic packaging and dental floss, the list is endless. It is patently clear that no single jurisdiction can tackle this problem alone. That is why the committee recommends the Government work with the Federal Government and other State governments via National Cabinet to support the phase‑out of all non-essential PFAS uses by 2030.
Significant work is being done on phasing out PFAS chemicals at the international level, and Australia should play a key role in that. In April this year, during the inquiry, NSW Health established a PFAS expert advisory panel to provide advice on effective communications to the community and health providers, the role of blood testing for PFAS and epidemiological studies with the current available evidence. On the day the committee had originally intended to consider the chair's draft report, we were advised that the panel was going to hand down its advice. This delayed our reporting date by three weeks because we wanted to ensure that the report was as up to date as possible before its release.
I am glad we did. The committee found that the advice provided by NSW Health on PFAS, including on potential associations with certain types of cancer and other diseases and whether individuals exposed to higher levels of PFAS should get their blood tested, required further scrutiny given conflicting evidence, the unsettled state of the science and the need to proceed consistent with the precautionary principle. I urge the Government to ensure this happens. Another important finding was that Sydney Water did not perform an appropriate level of due diligence before claiming in June 2024 that there were no known PFAS hotspots within its drinking water catchments. That members were able to agree on the strong recommendations contained in this report is an indication of how serious this issue is and the risks that PFAS chemicals pose to our health and environment if we do not do more to contain, control and remediate it.
Those recommendations include regular, risk‑based PFAS testing of water across the State and timely public disclosure of the results; more regular reviews of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines to ensure they align with international best practice; and support for blood testing for impacted communities. I will have more to contribute at a later time. But I genuinely thank my fellow committee members for the constructive and collegial way in which they participated in this important inquiry. We all learnt a lot. As always, I also thank the committee secretariat for their excellent work. I commend the report to the House.