Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I listened to you; it was difficult for me because I have not heard you for a while, but I did. And the words are in the legislation. Have a look at the Hansard in terms of the committee inquiry. The words are in the legislation. 'As a result of subsection 4 of this section, water access rights may be purchased only if the purchase is related to an adjustment of the long-term average sustainable diversion limit under section 23. That section requires the Basin Plan to prescribe criteria in relation to such adjustments. The effect of the criteria prescribed by the Basin Plan is that water access rights may be purchased only in conjunction with improving the irrigation on farms and an alternative proposed by a basin state.' This is a Commonwealth piece of legislation. The Commonwealth is saying in here, the minister has said and the Prime Minister has said that buyback will not apply in terms of the 450 gigalitres. There is absolutely no need for it.

The member for Farrer, the member for Riverina and many others who were involved in a number of reports actually recommended that, if more water is to be taken from the system, it should be done through on-farm works and measures; that was the great cry. But when someone comes along and does that, you have got to find this wriggle room in there to say that this is the greatest tragedy that is going to occur to people in the basin system, and I would ask people who may be listening to this to listen to the further hypocrisy that you are going to hear tonight in terms of this 450 gigalitres.

There is no buyback in it. There is no buyback. The minister may like to reiterate that and go to the clause. There is no buyback. It is a voluntary scheme. It says here: 'Water access rights may be purchased only in conjunction with improving irrigation on farms.' If the farmers decide that they do not want to improve their irrigation, they do not have to. And that is the point I made in my earlier speech. The baseline figure is 2,750 gigalitres. The 650 gigalitres comes off that, the basin states have agreed, through environmental works and measures—virtual water, in a sense, in terms of the 2,750 gigalitres. Then you have this new bill, for the 450 gigalitres, for on-farm works and measures and possible removal of some constraints to assist the flow. If the farming community is not interested in becoming more efficient, the answer to this could be zero, in terms of on-farm efficiencies. No-one has to accept it. But it is the very thing that, when the members for Farrer and Riverina and I visited these communities, the communities right throughout the basin kept saying to us: 'We don't mind a plan as long as it incorporates some money being spent on making us more efficient so that the productivity, the triple bottom line, of our communities, is maintained.' And that is exactly what we recommended, and these people actually endorsed those recommendations. The government has taken up those recommendations. We have revisited the concern that was expressed in this latest inquiry, and that has been fixed within the context of this particular bill. (Time expired)

See this speech in context