Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I think it boils down to this: there are different paths to achieve this. I think the path that I have suggested in this amendment is a clearer, unambiguous path. I appreciate what the government is saying. I feel more comfortable with the amendment. My concern is that the way the process will operate may be subject to a number of ambiguities and uncertainties where we will end up with certain projects being approved where there is an overall adverse impact on water security and food production. I understand it is a question of approach and which path will be more effective. I think there ought to be a legislative approach. I am not certain what the opposition's view is in relation to this. That may determine whether we have a division in relation to this or not. If this amendment fails, as appears likely, I am sure that there will be ongoing scrutiny of the methodology and of how the risk management principles are used. Again, it is a question of different paths presumably to reach the same objective. I believe the objective could be reached more easily with an unambiguous approach such as the one set out in this amendment.