Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Mallee for his comments and his advocacy for a better basin outcome than what we have seen over recent years. I am also joined in the chamber by the member for Murray whose strident and passionate lobbying to get certainty for her irrigators—not just those in the Murray electorate but those right throughout the Murray-Darling Basin—is commendable. I know she and I have worked very hard together to try to reach a shared outcome which everyone can be happy with or everybody can be satisfied with, but of course we all know that not everybody is going to be completely satisfied when it comes to water.

Whilst the member for Mallee was speaking, I received a text from Emma Bradbury who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Murray-Darling Association who said that, 'It was great to see the conversation on basin resources gathering unity and momentum, particularly from the agricultural productivity and sustainability perspective'—and of course, she is right. I met with Ms Bradbury this morning, along with the Chairman of the Murray-Darling Association, Greg Toll, a farmer from Gunbower, in the member for Murray's office. I know that they are going to be meeting with the Labor Country Caucus, given the fact that they also do need to reflect the views of the majority of the people who are very interested in production and in food and fibre, will give a good listening ear to those people from the Murray Darling Association. We need to have a good and viable Murray-Darling Basin plan.

I am joined in the chamber by the member for Murray, and she and I moved a disallowance to that plan in December 2012. We did it at the time out of frustration at the fact that we felt as though the government of the day was not listening. We had both sat on an exhaustive inquiry with the then Independent member for New England. We had gone right throughout the Murray-Darling Basin, conducting important talks and consultations with people who grow food and fibre but also with those people who felt as though there should be more water pushed through the system, people who were not that concerned about whether the supermarket shelves stock any Australian grown food but who just wanted an environmental outcome.

Ms Butler interjecting—

There were. You were not on that inquiry. I am just saying there were people from both sides. There were those who felt as though water should be just used for production. There were those who felt that water should be just used for the environment. The member for Murray and I always have known—and you should too, Member for Griffith—that there is a sensible balance. It is in the middle. I know you would appreciate that.

And so we met people from all sides and we ended up with a report that had 21 recommendations. I will give Tony Windsor credit where it is due; he always feared that there were ad hoc buybacks. He talked about the swiss cheese effect, about the damage that governments going in and just buying water willy-nilly just for the sake of the environment was damaging local regional river communities—not just the farmers, not just the irrigators but the machinery shops, the chemists, the schools because, once you take an irrigation farmer out of the system and take that productive water out of use, that family either shuts up shop or leaves the area totally. It leaves the area high and dry, and I mean every aspect of that term. There are not so many children going to that local school. The education department then looks and says: 'Do we really need the 4.6 teachers that were allocated to that school? Maybe we can make it 3.6.' Those sorts of things happen. They have an effect on river communities.

So moving that disallowance in December 2012—in the very last parliamentary sitting week—showed to our side of politics and, I hope, the other side of politics now how important it was to get a cap on buybacks. The cap was 1,500 gigalitres, which at the time meant that only 249 gigalitres still needed to be recovered. Over the course of the water sharing plans up to 2019 and thereafter, it seemed a very good idea at the time. It is now an excellent idea because we do need to say to irrigation farmers, river communities and environmentalists that enough is enough. Fifteen hundred gigalitres is a good number. It provides the environmentalists—and some of them are rabid, absolute greenies who do not care two hoots about the farmers who I represent, do not care two hoots about the fine Australian food that we grow and only want to see the water being pushed down the river system. I say that, whenever there is a prolonged drought, whenever we had a man-made drought forced on us in our electorates, the first living organisms to bounce back were the birds, frogs and lilies. They bounced back far quicker than the farmers did because Mother Nature always knows when it needs to quench its river systems.

We live in a country of droughts and flooding rains. That was the very title that Tony Windsor opted for in his very comprehensive report. I am just sorry that the previous government did not adopt that report, because I think that, if we had, we would have been in a far better position then than we are now.

But this cap on buyback does give certainty to my irrigators, my communities, and I know Dr Sharman Stone's people as well. It gives them the certainty to invest with confidence and hope for the future. It gives them the certainty and hope to try to attract more doctors, more professional people to their communities, because we need these communities to grow. There are the scaremongers out, even in my communities at the moment, saying that just about every shop in certain main streets of certain cities and towns in the Riverina is shut. That is not entirely correct. Banna Avenue in Griffith is going very, very well; it is hard to find a park there on any given day of the week. Leeton is humming and ticking along, as is Narrandera. There is some confidence brought back.

That confidence has been helped in part by the fact that we have a coalition government, and I do say that whilst also imploring the country members of the Labor Party opposite to get on board with the legislation, because it is good legislation. It should be bipartisan legislation, because it does give people—not just in coalition, including National Party, electorates but also those in Labor country electorates—certainty, and there are Labor country members who I know understand this. I can see the member for Griffith nodding, because she knows how important it is. She knows how important is the fact that when regional Australia is strong so too is our nation. When regional Australia is thriving so too is our nation.

In really advocating for this 1,500-gigalitre cap, I know it is going to give certainty to those wonderful irrigators—and they are. They are people who understand the river system and who want the very best. They do not want to see their rivers dry up. They do not want to see any environmental damage done by salinity or anything else that goes with a drought-affected river system. What we do need, and what we are getting by this legislation, is a shared common goal right throughout the Murray-Darling Basin and the capacity to manage. We are getting unity of purpose, and it is so important.

The Murray Darling Association, in a paper that they have given me this morning, say that as far as the 1,500-gig cap goes it is important and that the government obviously need bipartisan support. They understand that. They understand the politics of it. They understand the reality of it. The government does need the support of Labor and the crossbench senators to get the legislation through the Senate, and it is so important. I can not implore that enough.

The cap on buyback is the maximum amount of water that may be purchased by direct tender from water owners. It is important for the Riverina. It is important for Murray. It is crucial for Maranoa. I know that the Labor members will understand and appreciate just how important it is. I implore and urge them to get on board with this legislation. It is not just good for river communities or regional Australian; it is good for our nation and absolutely critical that it pass.

See this speech in context