Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the House for this opportunity to speak on the National Water Commission (Abolition) Bill 2015. There is no question, despite all the murmurings and mutterings—call it what you will—of those opposite, that the Abbott coalition government is committed to ensuring that this country protects its water resources, and at the same time it is equally committed to developing new water infrastructure.

The National Water Commission was established, as we have heard so many speakers reflect on, in 2004 by the Howard government to improve water security for all Australians in the face of a widescale drought in regional and rural Australia. These were the cries—the requests, the pleas—of the Australian people, and the Howard government responded accordingly. The commission was designed to uphold the roles of the National Water Initiative. This starts to get a little complicated, but let us not forget what I just said—the commission was designed to uphold the roles of the National Water Initiative. The National Water Initiative is designed to uphold the principles of trying to improve the efficiency of Australia's water use to promote investment for regional Australia—particularly towards the farming community—and, through programs, to promote environmental concerns. Of course we want to focus attention on our farming community, the great wealth creators of our nation, the people who put us on the map across the world as far as branding goes and whose produce is increasingly being sought by the growing Asian middle class. This is done through creating markets and trade for water and increasing urban water security. It is quite simple.

This government firmly believes the National Water Commission's work can be better carried out through the Productivity Commission. It will also be done through consultation between the state and territory and federal governments so that the public remains confident that government institutions make sure that the National Water Initiative is maintained. I want to spend a moment on this point. This work will be undertaken by the Productivity Commission. It will also be done through consultation between the state, territory and federal governments. Those opposite would have you believe—as the previous speaker, the member for Makin, was insinuating—that there is some conspiracy here, where all levels of government—

Mr Champion interjecting—

excuse me; are you right over there?—are conspiring to act in an untoward way when it comes to the national security of water. Well, we have good people working in the Productivity Commission and we have good people working at a state and territory level. We have experienced, qualified and committed people who will work, I am sure, to meet the principles of the initiative.

The reality is that the function of the Water Commission was more about auditing. Anybody who knows anything about that commission knows that it was more about auditing than it was about developing future water infrastructure. We ought to know a little bit about what happened here and we ought to put the record straight: the reality is that the function of the commission was more about auditing than it was about developing future water infrastructure. The development of water infrastructure is very important to my electorate, very important indeed.

The state and federal governments have a great history of working together, believe it or not, to reform water security for both country Australia and urban population centres. A key example of how the state and federal governments can work together to develop water infrastructure is to be seen in my home state of Tasmania. My lower house colleagues Eric Hutchinson and Andrew Nikolic, our Tasmanian colleagues in the Senate and I have joined the Deputy Premier of Tasmania, Jeremy Rockliff, who is also the Minister for Primary Industries and Water, and local farmers to work together alongside Tasmanian Irrigation to come up with five tranche 2 projects for Northern Tasmania. We made an announcement in relation to federal funding of $60 million just recently; that is going to be on top of the state contribution of $30 million.

I take this opportunity to highlight one of those projects, rather than to repeat much of what my colleague from Lyons, Eric Hutchinson, said earlier in this place, in a terrific speech. I encourage those either listening to or watching this to go to the member for Lyons' website and have a look at the speech that he made, which was a very creative way of explaining what has been happening in Tasmania over a certain period. It even had its own little hint of poetry and romance, which was a really excellent way of explaining the rainfall, the run-offs and the complications of the climate, as it is, for Tasmania. I recommend people go and read that.

The project I wish to highlight in this place is the Circular Head project, which is one of the five projects listed for priority funding. It will provide key pipelines to improve the ability to irrigate in the Circular Head region, one of the great pacesetters for dairy and all that comes from the dairy industry in our state. It is a blessing. Every day, they wake up down there with their pastures, and the quality of the milk that literally flows from that region should be, shall I say, shouted from the rooftops. That project will also increase the number of pump stations so that many, many more farmers can gain access to quality water. This project will release 21,400 megalitres to give that access to farmers in the region. It will create up to 150 jobs and help improve the ability of farmers to export their quality produce to both interstate and overseas markets, as well as improve the water security of the region.

What is happening in my home state when it comes to agriculture and horticulture is exciting. It is exciting, indeed, to see the levels of confidence and the increasing levels of investment coming on the back of people's own belief in what they can attain in the global economy. Obviously, it would be an understatement to say that the agricultural sector in Tasmania, more particularly in the north-west of my electorate, is excited about the prospects that are going to flow from the free trade agreements with Korea, Japan and China, and, hopefully, a free trade agreement with India, by opening up those export markets for these products—which will now, by the way, be able to be freighted to these export markets, with the enhancement of the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme, making them more competitive.

In our electorates, we see people from all over the world all the time. They want Australian produce. But, dare I say in this place, above Australian branding, they want Tasmanian branding. They want Cape Grim beef, they want King Island beef, they want the cleanliness of Cape Grim water, they want the top-notch whisky, they want the cheese, they want the berries. My job is to be an ambassador for my electorate, and it is quite an easy task when you have such good produce to sell.

So there are exciting days ahead, but for that to continue to grow in our state—at the state level, not just in my electorate—we need water infrastructure. I know we get plenty of rain, but we have more run-off as a percentage than pretty well anywhere else in the country. We have to capture the run-off from the rainfall in our great state and make sure it is put back where it is needed.

I take this opportunity to thank Jeremy Rockliff, the Minister for Primary Industry and Water in Tasmania, and the Prime Minister for their willingness to work together with the Tasmanian Liberal team to make sure that all Tasmanians can benefit from the work of their governments.

Some Tasmanian senators—not from this side of the House—have made statements in the Senate which are totally incorrect. I suspect that that will come as no surprise to many.

See this speech in context