Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment and Urban Water) Share this | Hansard source

If you believe in polluting our coasts, good for you, mate. Pollute our coasts and do not recycle. They are a disgrace when it comes to water.

I want to do this in three parts. Firstly, we will deal with the question of the water revolution. Secondly, the member for Calare will deal with the particular problems that rural communities have faced through this theft of water from the country to the city without giving the farmers the chance of water efficiencies. The Minister for Climate Change and Water said the Lower Lakes will not get a drop from the purchase of Toorale. Thirdly, the member for McEwen will deal with the impact of Pete’s pipeline on the people of the Goulburn and on the Murray. This is the reality of Pete’s pipeline.

While everybody is here, let us look at what the local people are saying about this pipeline: ‘This week Peter Garrett betrayed our communities—No savings; no water; no meeting.’ That is about the future of water. It is about the future of the communities. At the end of the day this government has sold out rural communities, failed to make the water efficiencies there and gone soft on the state governments, who continue to pump off our coasts 1,800 billion litres of waste water, which the rest of the world is recycling.

The member for Cook witnesses that 400 billion litres of waste water, primary treated sewage, goes off the coast of Sydney. As the member for Wentworth and Leader of the Opposition has previously said, basically they take out the sandshoes. It is a nightmare and a disgrace in terms of environmental pollution. It is water which the rest of the world recycles for industry and agriculture. It is water which comes off the member for Kingsford Smith’s own electorate and yet is not recycled—and I am not aware that he has stood up in protest at the nearly 100 billion litres of polluted waste water dumped off his coast every year by Sydney Water and that he has called for that water to be recycled now and for this pollution nightmare to stop.

Let us look then at the question of what should occur. We put in place a once-in-a-century water revolution. There was $6 billion in money for infrastructure, there was $3 billion in money for communities—of which half would help to assist in purchasing water, but after the infrastructure was put in place so the farmers could make the savings—and $1½ billion dollars to help fund rural communities. That money for rural communities, as the member for Calare will tell us, has gone—and that is what the people of Bourke and the surrounding districts will face. If we talk about evaporative losses, that is money which has evaporated. And the people of Bourke, who look set to lose 100 jobs from Toorale alone—and however many more from the region—will suffer as a result of not having a real rural adjustment plan and as a result of this bad purchase.

Secondly, we had $1 billion for the Bureau of Meteorology and other elements to do with monitoring and with making predictions on the effects of climate change—and we never, ever make the mistake of having a fundamental problem of misallocation and a fundamental underlying drought. We need to recognise that these are real and happening and we also need to make real assessments as to what might occur in the future.

The other critical thing that we put in place and which, in this once-in-a-century revolution, the member for Wentworth, the Leader of the Opposition, oversaw was the creation of a true national authority. It was a program which was intended to say to the states: ‘You cannot continue to mismanage.’ But what we have seen from the member for Kingsford Smith and from the new Prime Minister is the waving of the white flag on national water reform. The reason they have done that is very simple: they are weak. They have sold out to the state premiers. The state Labor premiers have seen them coming. They have apologised for the premiers. Instead of ending the blame game they have begun the apology game. When they talk about the blame game what they are doing is apologising for the mismanagement of state Labor premiers—and the apology for state Labor premiers on water continues because they have put off real reform. They had a chance; they had a blueprint; they had a plan; they had money; and they had an outcome—and they failed on all of them.

Let us look at what others have said about this once-in-a-century water reform. The President of the National Farmers Federation, David Crombie, said:

It was a strong announcement and I think there are probably few issues that are more important to all Australians than the efficient management and certainty relating to water and water supply.

The New South Wales Irrigators Council, through Doug Miell, said, ‘The plan is breathtaking in its scope.’ Simon Ramsay, the President of the Victorian Farmers Federation, said, ‘We certainly welcome the announcement of a significant investment in water management and infrastructure.’ It is that infrastructure component which has gone begging under this government. Instead of helping the farmers to make savings and water efficiencies which could be shared fifty-fifty with the farmers and the environment, they have said, ‘Sorry, guys; the money hasn’t gone to the farmers.’ What they are going to do is buy the farmers out, take the water away, not make the efficiency savings and not make the savings which could be good for the environment and good for the farmers.

And they have completely forgotten about something which the member for Calare talks about, the member for Murray talks about, the member for McEwen talks about, and so many others on our side of the House talk about: food security. They have a one-only approach, and that is: ‘Buy the lot. It doesn’t matter if we’re buying empty space in dams. It doesn’t matter if we’re simply buying rights without water. It doesn’t matter if we are spending $50 million on 10 swimming pools. We want to look as if we are doing something, and we don’t care if we are not actually doing something.’ At the end of the day, it is the farmers and the environment that miss out—from people who do not care about the country and do not care about our coasts.

That brings me to the fact that the government have dropped the ball on water reform on a truly national Murray-Darling Basin Authority with real powers at the national level. What they have also done is to put in place Pete’s pipeline. What this minister for the environment did was to make a decision on Pete’s pipeline which is based on no evidence, no environmental impact statement and no concern for the rural community. That is what the member for McEwen, the member for Murray and many others have said. It was an election promise that no water would be taken from the north; no water would be taken across the divide. That promise has been broken by both state and federal governments and, in their heart of hearts, they know it and they should feel ashamed. It is a misallocation, because if you do make these savings, as we proposed making savings, the savings should be shared first to the farmers and second to the environment—to the Goulburn, which is one of the most stressed rivers in Australia, or to the Murray, which we know is stressed. But these rivers miss out; instead, the farmers and the rivers will both be the poorer from a plan which is misconceived, misguided and a misallocation of water.

There is an alternative. We would not be able to stand up here and criticise if we did not have an alternative. On the one hand, we have their approach: water from the country to the city, the breach of the promise, the pipeline. On the other hand, we have our approach: water from the city to the country. Firstly, there is the potential for recycling and a water revolution. Eighteen hundred gigalitres of water—1,800 billion litres of water—is washed off our coasts by state Labor governments every year around the country. Four hundred billion litres of primary treated sewage gets dumped off Sydney’s coastline every year and is not recycled. It is too hard for the Carr, Iemma, Rees, Tebbutt governments—or whoever it is in the future. We see it in Victoria: 300 billion litres, including 150 billion litres of effluent at the shoreline at Gunnamatta Beach in my own electorate.

If we go to South Australia, which admittedly is the best in the country, we still see the best part of 100 billion litres off the coast. If we go to Perth, we see another 100 billion-plus litres off the coast and in Brisbane we see 200 billion-plus litres—but, fortunately, we put $400 million into ensuring that there will be a recycling scheme, which means that the water that comes out at Luggage Point will no longer be wasted. We see in the South Australian Liberal Party a plan to save 75 gigalitres of water by harvesting the stormwater, which is also wasted and sent down the gully traps and into the ocean.

We have a plan which is real, and that is a plan based on two things: firstly, recycling and stormwater for our cities and, secondly, real water savings in the country—savings which go to the farmers first and then go to the environment, but which are based on real action and real investment in infrastructure, not a meaningless pipeline. That is why this government should be condemned.

See this speech in context