Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Siewert, for the question. Can I say on the Coorong and the lower lakes that I have previously answered questions on that issue in this place, and it is a very serious situation we confront in that region. I have previously visited the lower lakes and, of course, to all South Australians the Coorong is an area that we absolutely understand the value of.

What the Australia government is dealing with there is, to be honest, a situation which results from a number of factors. The first of those is climate change and the reduction in water availability through the Murray-Darling Basin in southern Australia more generally, consistent with what the IPCC said and the CSIRO predictions. The second is a persistent drought. The third, of course, is a history of overallocation under successive governments, including by those who were in government prior to the Rudd Labor government. We are dealing with a very difficult situation in the lower lakes and the Coorong, and I have been quite clear about that. Obviously, we are confronting a situation where there were very low inflows for the last two years. We were hopeful, because of some of the weather predictions, that we might have seen a slightly less dry autumn than over the last two years. Unfortunately, to date in the relevant regions of Australia, that has not come to pass and we are still confronting very low inflows. Obviously, we are all hopeful of a better result in terms of rainfall over the winter. This is an issue that, as I said on previous occasions, I have asked for some urgent advice on given what has been put before the ministerial council.

I do make the point that the situation of the lower lakes has been something that certainly this government has been apprised of, as has the ministerial council, on previous occasions. You might recall, Senator Siewert, through you, Mr President, that we previously allocated $6 million to pump water into Lake Albert in order to manage the impact of low water levels and in order to stabilise its acid sulphate soil problem—and pumping is well underway on that issue.

In terms of the Montreux Record listing, which was mentioned I think in the second part of Senator Siewert’s question, the Montreux Record is a voluntary tool under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands which is used to highlight sites that have been subject to actual or likely adverse changes in ecological character. In December 2006, following discussions with South Australia, the Australian government did notify the Ramsar secretariat of a change in the ecological character of this Ramsar site in accordance with its obligations under article 3.2 of the convention. In making these notifications—which occurred, as I said, in December 2006—contracting parties are encouraged to consider whether the site would benefit from listing on the Montreux Record. The Australian government’s position is that Montreux listing is considered on a case-by-case basis under the guiding principle that Australia only lists sites on the record when all locally generated remedial actions have been exhausted and where there is a high probability that such a listing would assist in achieving improvements in the on-ground condition of the Ramsar site.