Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question without notice is to the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources. Is the minister aware that with only a tiny 22 million megalitres the Murray-Darling and its south-east environs produce two-thirds of Australia’s agriculture? Is the minister further aware that the northern quarter of Australia has 300 million megalitres of Australia’s water—three-quarters of the water—but only one 20th of Australia’s agriculture?

Opposition Member:

Gigalitres, you mean?

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, megalitres. In light of this could the minister assure the North Queensland shires with water projects that he will meet with them ASAP and help facilitate such sustainable development? Finally, could the minister verify whether it is in fact true that seven per cent of the gulf’s 134 million megalitres of run-off would irrigate five per cent of the gulf and this under sugarcane would meet all of Australia’s annual petrol requirements, cutting Australia’s CO emissions by a towering 81 million tonnes per year?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Kennedy. I will answer his five questions in order. In answer to the first question, two-thirds of Australia’s agriculture is somewhat more than most people regard the Murray-Darling Basin as producing. The figure is generally stated as being between 40 and 50 per cent. Nonetheless, it is true that our largest and most productive agricultural area does its work for Australia with only six per cent of our run-off, emphasising yet again the importance of the Prime Minister’s $10 billion plan for reviving and making efficient Australia’s irrigated agriculture, 80-odd per cent of which is in the Murray-Darling Basin. But, as the Leader of the Opposition would know if he had bothered to read the Prime Minister’s speech, which he plainly has not, the $10 billion plan, as the Prime Minister emphasised repeatedly, is available across Australia. Not only did he say that but he cited a number of irrigation areas in Queensland and in Western Australia that could be eligible.

The second question was about the superabundance of water in northern Australia. We understand that about two-thirds of our run-off is in the tropical north. Regarding the third question, meeting with North Queensland shires, I can assure the member for Kennedy that I meet with parties seeking grants under the Australian government water fund all the time. The management of that program is done by the Water Commission, but I am very happy to meet with his constituents.

As to his fourth and final questions about the irrigation potential of the north and the ethanol production potential from sugarcane in the north, these are the sorts of issues that the government is addressing through the task force being set up under the chairmanship of Senator Bill Heffernan. Australia’s north is where the bulk of our water is. It is something that we have to manage sustainably. We have invested tens of millions of dollars in science into northern water so that we do not make the same mistakes in the north as we have in the south. It is a region of great opportunity and we are focused on that opportunity and will continue to be, in the national interest.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Albanese interjecting

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Finally, the Australian government water fund has already invested substantial amounts in Northern Queensland, in the electorates of Herbert, Dawson and Capricornia—a fact the honourable member opposite is probably not prepared to concede to the government.