Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

What was ‘accurate’—thank you very much to the member for McEwen—was what the then parliamentary secretary for water said in 2006 when he described it as a ‘win-win partnership between city and country’. And let us all hope that, in his new capacity, the new Leader of the Opposition will demonstrate some leadership and stop the kind of nonsense that has been talked here today on this matter of public importance by those opposite, who do not understand the role of the federal minister in environmental regulation and have demonstrated yet again that they do not believe in science. They do not believe in the science of climate change. They want to deny that. They do not believe in the science of environmental assessment. They want to deny that, too. They think, and they have demonstrated by their speeches here today, that ministerial decisions are only a matter of party political advantage. They do not understand, because that is the way those opposite behaved when they were in government. It is always party political advantage—it is never the national interest; it is never taking decisions in the long-term interests of this country, which is what this government is doing. The reason that massive projects of this nature, of the nature of the Sugarloaf pipeline and the Food Bowl Modernisation Project, are needed in places like northern Victoria is that we had, for nearly 12 years, neglect by the former government and, before that, in Victoria we had neglect by the Kennett government.

I say again: the irrigation system in Victoria is over 100 years old. It has had some very piecemeal updating over the last few years, but it requires overhaul of the whole system. The project that the state government has put in place is an overhaul of the whole system and it should be being commended by those opposite, not smeared by the kind of deliberate campaign of, really, emotive misinformation that is being promoted in the area by the member for Murray and is being promoted here by the member for Flinders. I notice, indeed, that the member for Murray has chosen not to speak on this matter.

It is absurd to suggest that this project is not paying attention to food security. It is paying close attention to food security. It is absurd to suggest that anything has occurred here that is anything other than complete respect for the environment. The approval process that the federal minister for the environment has engaged in will ensure that there is no adverse impact on matters of national environmental significance. There are conditions that the minister for the environment has imposed which will ensure that that occurs.

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context