Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The member for Nicholls is continuing the campaign initiated by his predecessor in this place to try and do away with the 450 gigalitres of additional water that was agreed to at the time the plan was put in place. I don't criticise him for that. He is stating what he believes his community wants and he has every right to do that. But I also noticed that, along with his National Party colleagues, there was an attempt to effectively do away with the whole plan in the last parliament that was not supported by the Liberal members of the government at the time. It never got up because they did not have the numbers.

Putting that aside, I was part of the committee that went through all the Murray-Darling Basin communities back in 2010 and 2011 which looked at the issues they were confronted with after a decade of drought and at how we could best resolve those issues and secure water for the future. The plan came into effect in 2012 after literally 100 years of bickering between the states. Yes, it did not meet all objectives of all states but it was put together in the best interests of all the states. I say to the member for Nicholls: the 450 gigalitres of additional water that was agreed to at the time, which came up to 3,200 gigalitres, was still in total less than what most of the scientists were saying should be returned to the river system. Nevertheless, that was what we settled on.

The reality is that plan did not rely on emotions and misinformation. It actually relied on the best scientific advice available to the committee at the time. We also took into account future changes relating to climate change, where I understand the CSIRO is saying that, by the 2050, there will be about a 30 per cent deduction of inflows into the river. So if we want security for those communities, we need to plan in advance, because long-term sustainability is going to bring individual and community security right throughout the Basin. I say to the member for Nicholls: I also, like the member for Maranoa, heard first-hand from farmers who, yes, were in tears. I don't dispute that at all, but they were in tears right across the Basin communities. I saw towns that had literally been destroyed because of the lack of water. I don't want to see that again either, and the only way we can guarantee that's not going to happen is to have a secure Murray-Darling Basin that is actually sustainable into the future. Because if it is not sustainable, it's a greater threat, not just to individual communities where water is being sold but to communities right across the Basin itself.

I note members opposite criticise the water buybacks. I did not hear a word of criticism when tens of millions of dollars of water buybacks went to people who were associated with members opposite—I'm sure members opposite know who I'm referring to—and there was not a peep about that. Can I also say in response to one of the issues raised by member for Maranoa about investing in infrastructure projects: my understanding is that the minister has already put that to the states on two occasions and not a single infrastructure project has been put on the table for her to consider. Because if it was, I'm sure she would have done that. So we go back to water buybacks, with water buybacks being the only mechanism left when you know that after nine years you haven't achieved the objective you are looking for. We still have more work to do.

I feel for the people in the Murray-Darling Basin. I also acknowledge its agricultural and tourism value to the nation. I also understand that farmers have put a lot of money into their farms. I get that. Can I say to the members opposite: I have a lot of relatives who are actually in that situation, and I understand that very well, but I also understand that it's in everybody's interest to ensure that we have a sustainable basin into the future. We're seeing that that is not the case right now, even with the fish deaths that are occurring right now and, similarly, what happened four years ago. Again, it's all about bad management of the Murray River system. I'm not particularly criticising anyone, but that's why we need a sustainable Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

See this speech in context