Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Hansard source

I'll take the opportunity to clarify, for the Leader of the Nationals, that the specific amendment that he is referring to is to provide additional clarification on who has the evidential burden by inserting notes at the end of application provisions for trusts, partnerships and unincorporated associations in the bill. The Water Act already has this provision which reverses the evidential burden for persons seeking to rely on an excuse, exemption or justification in proceedings for a pecuniary penalty order. That's already there.

It's the legislation that the Leader of the Nationals is boasting about supporting. This amendment is intended to provide clarity on the reversed evidential burden in certain application provisions in the bill, and it doesn't alter the operations of the relevant sections. The Leader of the Nationals is talking about progress. Just 16 per cent of water that has been recovered towards the plan has been done in the last decade, when you had the opportunity to recover it. If you thought you had a better way of doing it, you should have used the last decade to do it, but just 16 per cent of the total was recovered.

Opposition members interjecting—

Well, when? On the current projections on the 450, we would have got there in the year 4000.

An opposition member interjecting—

I'm not sure whether you think achieving an objective in the year 4000 is delivering for communities.

Finally, I have to clarify that the reason we're extending the delivery time for infrastructure projects is so that we can complete more of them. If more of them come forward, we're happy to look at them. We're happy to look at on-farm efficiencies. We're happy to look at off-farm efficiencies. We are very happy to look at the broad range of mechanisms for delivering the plan. What we're not prepared to do is not deliver, which is what's been happening for the last decade.

See this speech in context