Senate debates

Monday, 2 May 2016

Bills

Water Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2015; Second Reading

9:02 pm

Photo of David LeyonhjelmDavid Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | Hansard source

I spent a fair bit of time last year travelling around the Murray-Darling river system—from Queensland, through the MIA and down to the mouth of the Murray River. My job as Chair of the Senate Select Committee on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan was to listen to people.

I am here to report that under the Basin Plan many people in the Murray-Darling Basin are hurting. The places we visited were diverse. But one thing that towns dependent on irrigated agriculture have in common is that they are suffering. Businesses are in decline, jobs are being lost and people are leaving. It is not just irrigators who suffer in these towns: it is the mechanics, the retailers, the teachers and the contractors. We heard far too many sad stories of personal hardship. What is more, under the current Basin Plan food processors tell us that Australia's aspiration to become a food bowl for Asia is not a vision, it is a pipedream. Without water, we cannot produce food.

Mr Acting Deputy President, I tell you this to explain that while I am prepared to support the Water Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2016 before us today, I view it as a great disappointment. The bill slightly expands the circumstances where the Commonwealth can sell water to irrigators, which is a good thing. But it delays future reviews of the Water Act and the Basin Plan, which is a tactic to avoid hearing from suffering basin communities and to avoid doing anything to fix the plan before it does more damage.

The most disappointing thing is that this bill addresses none of the fundamental problems with the Basin Plan and its implementation that have been raised in the report of the Senate Select Committee. And it does nothing to improve water allocations for irrigators.

It demonstrates that the government remains wedded to the childlike notion that it somehow benefits the environment to simply fill the river to the brim, while people are denied water. National Party senators in particular should be ashamed that on this most important issue they have pulled their Akubras over their ears and tuned out. If there were any doubt about this, it was removed when they voted against my modest proposal for a one per cent increase in water allocations for irrigators late last year.

Allow me to remind the government of just a few of the recommendations of the select committee, based on what the people of the Murray-Darling are crying out for. They say there should be no more water buybacks. Buybacks might be okay for those who are selling water, but there are many others affected. The bottom line is that they are destroying regional Australia.

They say too much water is being taken from 'terminal' systems such as the Macquarie Valley and Gwydir Valley for little or no environmental benefit. They say there should be a judicial inquiry into the shambolic management of the Goulburn-Murray Water Connections Project. They are worried that government sanctioned floods will damage their properties. They, and state water agencies, say cold water releases by the MDBA are killing off native fish and promoting the proliferation of carp.

They say federal and state governments need to secure Broken Hill's water supply and allow the Menindee Lakes to retain water. They say we should consider how much fresh water is evaporating from the South Australian lower lakes, and whether it would be better for all concerned if this were salt water. This could be accomplished quite easily by removing the barrages that prevent the end of the Murray from returning to its natural estuarine state and building a weir near Wellington to maintain a freshwater source for Adelaide and its irrigators. The Murray River is Australia's only river where we allow fresh water to run out to sea, but we do not allow sea water to flow back in. It is abnormal.

The people of the Murray-Darling are crying out, at the very least, for a cost-benefit analysis of the Basin Plan. They cherish the environment they live in, but say that we need to stop putting people last. Economic and social considerations need to be given equal priority.

I urge the government to respond to the report of the Senate Select Committee before the election, and for this response to accept the committee's 31 majority recommendations. Between now and the election I will pressure the government to better serve the people of the Murray-Darling Basin, and so long as the Liberal Democrats have any representatives in this chamber this pressure will continue after it as well.

Comments

No comments