Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources and relates to a recent announcement of $6½ million from the Australian government water fund towards a $29 million upgrade of Chaffey Dam in my electorate. Given that the Deputy Prime Minister declared that the funding was a done deal and not an election promise, how does the minister explain comments in today’s Financial Review, where his office states in relation to Chaffey Dam:

... there were hurdles to clear before the commonwealth funding could proceed.

His office also stated that the project needed to be ‘consistent with the principles of the National Water Initiative and the objectives of the National Plan for Water Security’. Could the minister explain these inconsistencies between his office’s statements and Mr Vaile’s announcements? Could the minister guarantee to the people of Tamworth that the upgrade will proceed?

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

I thank the honourable member for his question. The Deputy Prime Minister’s announcement on 3 September to contribute $6½ million to the Chaffey Dam augmentation project will improve water supply security for Tamworth and Peel Valley irrigators. It is important for the honourable member to remember that the funding is provided through the Australian government water fund, which is administered by the National Water Commission. It is contingent, as is all funding through the water fund, on the National Water Commission being satisfied with the business plan and being satisfied that the project is shown to be consistent with the National Plan for Water Security, the National Water Initiative and the Australian government’s environmental standards.

The dam expansion will undoubtedly be referred for consideration as a controlled action under the EPBC Act, so that is an environmental permitting hurdle that it has to meet. The funding is also contingent on the New South Wales government and other stakeholders meeting their agreed funding shares. I am optimistic that those conditions can be met, but they are in large measure in the hands of other people. The honourable member must understand that all water funding out of the Australian government water fund has to meet these or similar conditions.