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

I want to make these points and perhaps remind the chamber, including the crossbenchers, of the Liberal Party’s position and the National Party’s position on water. I hope that the Greens when they hold us to account also hold to account those opposite for failing to do anything for 12 years. I hope when they hold us to account they also hold the opposition to account for their criticism of water purchase, which I understood the Greens to support and which this government has had the courage, in the face of very significant opposition upstream, to continue. I hope that, just as the opposition is commended for moving an amendment, the Greens would also commend the government for, in the face of significant political opposition, continuing water purchases because we believe it is the right thing to do.

I hope when people criticise the government for its perceived failures that there is also a recognition of statements being made by opposition frontbenchers such as, ‘Minister Wong’s decision to buy $3.1 billion of water entitlements guarantees that communities currently in the worst drought in living memory will go from a natural drought to a Rudd-made drought.’ I hope those sorts of comments are the subject of criticism from the Greens and from Liberal senators like Senator Birmingham who say we should buy more. I hope when we talk about the Lower Lakes that Liberal senators who stood up in here and said that we should save the Lower Lakes will come out and condemn frontbenchers of their own party who say that we should open the barrages to the Lower Lakes. But I have not heard Senators Birmingham and Fisher do that.

People criticise this government for seeking to move to free up water trading and to negotiate to remove the caps that limit that trading. I hope that those who think we should do that also criticise Liberal frontbenchers who criticise those efforts, such as Dr Stone, and say those caps should not be removed. So let us inject into this debate a little bit of fairness, a little bit of policy rigour, because I for one am tired of this debate not recognising the extraordinary inconsistencies of those opposite. Senators Birmingham and Fisher can come in here and talk about the Lower Lakes but refuse to roll people in their own party who are critical of water purchases.

We had the extraordinary situation in Senate estimates where we talked about a 1,500-gigalitre target. I think the Greens have been on record wanting double that. My recollection, Senator Brown, is that in one of the elections you indicated 3,000 gigalitres. That is reasonable for an environmental party to push; I accept that. We had Senator Joyce saying, in front of everybody, to Senator Birmingham, ‘We don’t support that.’ This is the alternative government. What is their policy? What is their position? So all I say to those from an environmental perspective who commend the opposition is this: I trust you will be reasonable enough and fair enough and recognise your own constituency enough to also condemn them for the great many things that they either failed to do or still are not supportive of.

In terms of this Lower Lakes issue, the same sorts of inconsistencies by those opposite that I have already outlined are really most patent. Senators, you cannot come in here professing that you do everything for the people of the Lower Lakes and professing that you want to see water returned to that area unless you are prepared to do the hard yards and roll those in your party who are opposed to water purchases and who have described this purchasing as a ‘Rudd-made drought’. You cannot have it both ways, because ultimately people will judge you by what you do, not by what you say. You speak but you do not act. You do not come out and say, ‘They’re wrong.’ You do not come out and say, ‘This is our position.’ You do not come out and say: ‘Yes, we will do this. We will purchase. We will ensure that those upstream know that the Victorian Liberals and the National Party members who are opposed to purchases, those who are critical of purchases, do not represent the views of Mr Turnbull and the party.’ I actually think Mr Turnbull does think we should do something, but clearly he and those around him are unable to control the members of the National Party who are running this debate in the Senate and the members of their own front bench who are more interested in speaking to their local constituency and not dealing with the big problem.