Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources) Share this | Hansard source

Can I firstly make it very, very clear to this chamber that the federal government—and that includes every one of my colleagues in this place and the other place from South Australia—take the allegations that were made on the Four Corners program about corruption and the management of water resources in the Barwon-Darling catchment very, very seriously. But this should not be a competition about who is more outraged about the allegations. This actually should be about determining the validity of the allegations, determining the magnitude of any breaches, taking action against the authority or any person who's broken the law, and making sure that we put things in place so that this does not happen again.

I have a question for those who are supporting this motion: what exactly is it that you want to investigate that's not being covered by the separate inquiries already underway? We have the NSW independent inquiry headed up by Ken Matthews, an eminent person who used to head up the National Water Commission, who's investigating the very specific allegations of the Four Corners program. We have the Murray-Darling Basin Authority basin-wide review into compliance with state-based regulations governing water use. It also should be noted that the MDBA has some very extensive powers for information gathering under the Water Act.

We have the ANAO review into how the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources is monitoring the performance of NSW regarding the protection of environmental water. And we have the NSW ICAC, where all allegations have been referred to. It should be noted that the NSW ICAC have the powers to compel the production of documents; they have the powers to compel a public authority or an official to provide evidence; they have the powers to enter property occupied by a public authority or an official to inspect or copy documents; they have the authority to obtain search warrants; they have the authority to use surveillance devices; and they have the ability to compel witnesses to answer questions—but, most importantly, they hold the majority of their hearings in public. They've jailed ministers and they've seen off a premier. They are an extraordinarily powerful organisation. I ask again: what is it that you are actually seeking to investigate that isn't currently being investigated by the four separate inquiries that I have just outlined?

All of these inquiries are underway and we're expecting the initial report from the NSW inquiry before the end of the month. The Murray-Darling Basin inquiry is required to report by December. The referrals to ICAC and the ANAO have already occurred. A royal commission—which is basically what those opposite and those people supporting this motion today and this MPI are basically asking for—will take months and months and months to establish and will cost tens of millions of dollars. I know that the communities that I represent and the communities along the Murray-Darling Basin want quick answers. They want quick resolutions. I seriously believe that they do not want us to be playing politics with this particular issue.

However, I must say that I was particularly pleased that, following these allegations, the South Australian Labor government has apparently rediscovered its desire for openness and transparency. A South Australian government minister said:

The Commonwealth Government needs to step in to ensure public confidence in an open, transparent and full investigation …

I assume this means that the South Australian government will ensure public confidence by allowing open, transparent and full investigations into many other issues, such as the abuse allegations at the Oakden aged-care facility, the land sale at Gillman or the ongoing scandals involving Families SA or the Department for Child Protection.

The SA government can't credibly call for openness and transparency in New South Wales when it denies the very same openness and transparency in its own state. Only last month, the South Australian government actually voted down a bill to allow the South Australian ICAC to hold public hearings into the Oakden facility. When questioned why he supported transparency in this particular water inquiry but was quite happy to vote down transparency when it came to the inquiry into the Oakden facility, the Premier actually responded, 'It's just a separate matter that has different considerations.' He then went on to accuse the NSW ICAC of 'unfairly staining reputations' because it holds its hearings in public. I haven't heard those opposite calling out for the South Australian government to guarantee transparency in any of its actions. You know, you guys, you can't just be convenient; you have to be consistent if you're going to have any credibility in this space.

Most importantly, we need to get on with the job of delivering a plan. Nobody's interests are going to be served by the stalling of the plan—or, worse still, blowing it up. It's taken us 100 years to get to the table to agree to the actions that are needed to have a sustainable Murray-Darling Basin system, and we mustn't let all this fantastic work be derailed just because we decide that we're going to play a political game. Through cooperation and collaboration, we've got to where we are, and I have to say there's some really good news out there—great news. As of 30 June this year we had already recovered 2,083 gigalitres of water. That's in addition to the 600-plus gigalitres of water we've been able to secure through the STL adjustment mechanism. That's water that's been achieved through efficiency measures, which means it has not been taken out of productive use. It hasn't been taken out of the communities like the one that I live in, which is supported totally by the irrigation capacity that is delivered by the Murray-Darling Basin. I'd like to think that maybe somebody else who is going to stand up in this place actually has firsthand understanding and knowledge of the consequences of this plan not going forward. I doubt they do.

We also put in place the 1,500 gigalitre cap on buyback, to make sure we didn't continue to strip the very essence and ability from our communities and actually send them broke. We are on target to deliver our targets for 2019, when we said that we would have delivered 2,750 gigalitres of water for the sole use of the environment. That is a great track record. That is a good-news story, and I think it is very sad that we are standing here today jeopardising and potentially derailing what we have worked so hard together to try to achieve.

What I would say to this place is: we are but five years into the 12 years of implementation of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. We are on track and have achieved a huge amount. We have achieved this because we have worked together, all jurisdictions—Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, the ACT and the Commonwealth—have worked together, and we are on track to deliver this plan that is so vitally important to every single community that lives along the river. It is also vitally important that we have a sustainable river system for those communities. We have worked together over the last five years to get to the place we are now. We have another seven years before we've delivered this plan in full. We sit here today on the edge of the cliff, deciding whether we are going to blow this plan up with politics or whether we are all going to get back together and make sure that we deliver this plan in full.

I can give this chamber an absolutely unconditional guarantee that it is my sole objective to deliver this plan. I'm not going to play politics with it; I'm not going to play games. I actually want to sit down and deliver this plan, because I believe it is the fundamental responsibility of every single person in this place to honour the commitment of those that went before us. When the Labor Party and the coalition got together and decided that we were going to implement this plan, it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for cooperation between the two major parties to deliver an outcome that was so terribly needed.

I find it extraordinary that we should even be considering not going back to the table and having a discussion about how we can get past this unfortunate situation that has been alleged by Four Corners. We need to deal with that, no question at all, but let's not play politics. We need to deliver this plan. We need to deliver this plan for the benefit of the river. We need to deliver this plan for the benefit of the communities that rely on this river. But most particularly, we need to deliver this plan for the broader benefit of all Australians. The food bowl of Australia exists in the Murray-Darling Basin. The economic activity that's generated within this particular area is massive, and every Australian benefits when the Murray-Darling Basin is doing what it can do best. We have seen massive water efficiencies and massive productive efficiencies occur through the delivery of the first five years of this plan. The opportunities to make this an absolute first-class, state-of-the-art food bowl for the world absolutely exist. I would like to think that everybody in this place will stand with me. Let's get back to the table and come up with an agreement so that we can put these allegations behind us, deal with them, and get on with delivering the Murray-Darling Basin plan in full, on time, on budget, for the benefit of every single Australian.