Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources) Share this | Hansard source

And if it is doubted that Mr Stern is under any delusions of the kind that afflict the opposition, what did he say? ‘Every country in the world has to get involved,’ he said on ABC radio on 3 November: ‘I don’t think we have to insist on everything being done the same way all around the world. Even if we wanted to we could not do that successfully. Australia is good at technology. They’ve got wind, they’ve got coal and they’ve got uranium. There are so many ways in which Australia could bring so much to the table, we’ve got to get all countries involved.’

That was the message: it is global engagement that will provide the reduction in emissions that we need. But the interesting part about the opposition is that they go on and on about climate change as though we are debating a theological issue: ‘Does he believe in climate change? Does he believe enough? Is he a purist? Is he a sceptic? Is he a believer of whatever gradation?’ And no doubt different punishments will be awarded by the inquisition run by the members for Griffith and Kingsford Smith, depending on the degree of doubts. No credit, apparently, will be given for conversions. But no mention is made of the key consequence of climate change to Australia, and that is water scarcity. And that, as I said yesterday, is a matter where John Howard has been prescient those are not my words; those are Paul Kelly’s words.

The Prime Minister has been prescient on the issue of water. He has provided $2 billion over five years to establish the Australian government water fund, which is promoting research, innovation, recycling projects and sustainable water management. In the Wimmera Mallee, 16,000 kilometres of leaky, open drains are being replaced by 8,000 kilometres of pipes. Over 100 gigalitres of water will be saved, a great benefit for the environment and a great improvement in water security for the people of that region. That is the type of practical measure that we are undertaking all over Australia.

And then, only two weeks ago, the Prime Minister announced his $10 billion 10-point plan to take charge of the Murray-Darling Basin for the first time, to do what everybody has said should be done but was impossible: give the federal government responsibility over the interstate rivers—which, we all know, cannot be managed other than by the national government because the four states involved, whether they have the best will in the world or not, are essentially in competition with each other. This planned proposal, which appears to be receiving a high degree of support from the premiers, to take over the interstate rivers—the Murray-Darling Basin—is revolutionary. It is historic, and it has had the support of the member for Kingsford Smith. As he said only this morning: ‘We have always said we support a national water plan. That is something that was part of Labor policy.’ Well, I would ask the member for Kingsford Smith where in the Labor Party’s policy it says that the Commonwealth government should take control of the Murray-Darling Basin. You know it does not.

See this speech in context