Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to commend the Senate, which yesterday decided to set up a select committee on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. This was put by Senator Day, a senator for South Australia. I also am very pleased with the terms of reference that have been listed to guide this particular reference. They include the implementation of the plan; its progress; its costs, especially those related further implementation; and its direct and indirect effects on agricultural industries, local businesses and community wellbeing, which picks up on the fact that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan was always expected to be a balance of the environment, the economy and the community's wellbeing. It has been lost along the way, sadly. But I am so pleased the Senate is going to look at just how this balance is being achieved.

They are going to look at any evidence of environmental changes to date and the effectiveness or the appropriateness of the planned Constraints Management Strategy. At last, we are going to have the words which so many people dare not speak put out into the open air. The Constraints Management Strategy was a Labor-Green urgent, political fix by Gillard and Premier of South Australia in the dying days the Gillard government. Julia Gillard, the then Prime Minister, was hoping for a sign-off by all states and she found that the Premier of South Australia was backing off, saying, 'No, I just want more water. There's not enough water for me. I know the rest of the states have agreed and are about to sign-off, but there should be more water for me.' So this 450 gigalitre extra volume of water was put into legislation and rushed through without consultation.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Shame, shame!

Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Riverina understands this only too well and the impacts on his electorate. I have to say, we are in the second year of this Constraints Management Strategy legislation. $1.77 billion has been put aside for it. My Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority told me last week that they have been asked to do a business case and a cost-benefit analysis of the Goulburn Valley within just 12 weeks in terms of the Constraints Management Strategy impacts.

You cannot do anything sensible in just that number of weeks. They cannot really do any genuine assessments of the impact of throwing more water out of the Eildon dam just keep the mouth of the Murray open 95 per cent of the time without the aid of bulldozing, because in the Goulburn system we do not monitor or gauge the tributaries to the Goulburn River. How the heck are they supposed to know what happens with a rain event on top of that water being thrown down to keep the mouth of the Murray open? Well, what you do get is floods.

I am so pleased that the Constraints Management Strategy is going to be looked out earnestly in terms of its effectiveness and appropriateness. We are also going to identify constraints and options to mitigate the identified risks. Out of the $1.77 billion, only $200 million of that $1.7 7 billion is supposed to be spent on raising the bridges and the railway lines and building the levies higher to protect the cities, towns, prime farmland and the Wagga Wagga sewerage works when those floods go through every two or so years.

They are also going to look at environmental water flows and river channel capacity. I hope they will really look at the Barmah choke and the management of the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray mouth, including the environmental impacts of the locks, weirs and barrages on the Murray River. Let us remind ourselves that many of those locks, weirs and barrages are now at the end of their life and they do need serious consideration in terms of their effectiveness and efficiency. I am very pleased about the Senate inquiry. It has got a reasonable amount of time, up to 26 February, to have its results in.

I did think that there would be another good way to look at the impacts of this plan on the state of Victoria, particularly the Goulburn-Murray Water authority and that irrigation district; that is bigger than the state of Tasmania. But unfortunately, in the mid-term review of the efficiency and effectiveness of the Commonwealth of Australia's $1 billion investment in the project stage 2, when I look at the actual terms of reference for this mid-term review, I am astonished to find that the review will be based on interviews with project personnel and analyses of relevant documents and project reports. Who is writing those project reports and relevant documents? The Department of the Environment, Goulburn-Murray Water itself and the department of environment in the state of Victoria. No stakeholders are to be consulted. The farmers who are suffering the impacts of this mismanagement and botched scheme, which requires another 200 gigalitres to be taken out of their farms, are not to be consulted.

I am so please we have got this Senate inquiry. I want the mid-term review and terms of references amended. The state of Victoria cannot get away with this. I commend the Senate's inquiry to the people of Australia.

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

It being 5 pm, the debate is interrupted.

House adjourned at 17:00