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

I will make a few comments, first, to acknowledge the contributions made to the debate by all senators. I particularly acknowledge the contribution made by Senator Nash to the previous debate and, notwithstanding that I did not agree with a lot of what she did, the obvious workload that she took on in that regard.

I welcome Senator Minchin’s indication on behalf of the opposition that the opposition will not be insisting on the amendments. It is clear that in the opposition wiser heads have prevailed. Senator Minchin made a few accusations and criticisms and some strong rhetorical points in his contribution. I do not propose to respond to them on behalf of the government tonight. I think that many of the issues have been well traversed in earlier debate and the government’s views are clear. Despite the rhetoric, the fact is that the opposition are not insisting on their amendments, including in relation to the pipeline. That is the indication from Senator Minchin. As I said, we welcome the fact that wiser heads have prevailed.

As I think I said in the second reading debate, the first agreement in relation to the River Murray was in 1914. In 1992 the latest version of the Murray-Darling agreement was put in place. From 1914 to date we have not had a management regime, an architecture, dealing with the Murray-Darling Basin that recognised the simple fact that rivers flow across state borders. The legislation before the house puts that architecture in place for the first time. It is architecture that delivers a whole-of-basin approach. It seeks to manage the basin as a whole. For the first time in this nation’s history it will set a cap based on science. For the first time in this nation’s history it will ensure that that cap and the basin plan, after consultation, ultimately are decisions of the Commonwealth minister. Importantly, it will also ensure that the basin plan is undertaken by an independent authority, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority.

Can I make this point: I think it is 12 months tomorrow since the Rudd government ministry was sworn in and there has been a substantial amount of progress on water in that time. We see this bill before the Senate, which, as senators know, required a very extensive set of negotiations with the states, for the first time engaging the enabling and referral powers upon which some of the bill is predicated. But I want to make it very clear to the chamber that the government understand that there is a lot more left to do. We are making progress but we do understand that the challenge of the Murray-Darling Basin is an enormous one. It is one that is compounded by the inaction of the previous government. It is compounded by years of failure to manage the basin properly and sustainably—