Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Hansard source

There is an arrogance emanating from the Albanese government, and it's really starting to manifest itself in the smug self-assurance that ministers in this place are the font of all wisdom. We have seen it in the way this government has gone about ignoring those on the front line, whether it be irrigation communities, pharmacists, Western Australian farmers over the banning of live exports or slashing funding to control the environmentally catastrophic pests like fire ants and let's not forget the Labor's transmission lines debacle. The Albanese government has already gained a reputation for lip service when it comes to consultation. They are forcing businesses and industry groups to sign confidentiality agreements just to consult on policies that directly impact what they do. Forcing businesses to sign these agreements is an appalling way to give Australians confidence that the government is listening and acting on the concerns they have. I mean, what happened to the government of transparency?

We've heard from our constituents that Labor ministers are refusing requests. We've heard from a mayor in the north of the state that she was told that the minister couldn't meet with them or their constituents because they're concerned about the bureaucrats' safety in travelling to rural communities. Really? They're not sending bureaucrats out to consult on the ground because they're concerned about safety? They've offered webinars instead of face-to-face meetings. They insult our communities by giving very short time frames. Many who've suffered years of droughts, floods, fires and now the threat of drought again are basically being told their voice doesn't matter.

Ministers and agencies are refusing to directly engage. We need to look no further than the Minister for the Environment and Water, whose refusal to engage with farming organisations and their communities in the Murray-Darling Basin is highlighted on her Twitter feed, which shows she's only been to the basin a handful of times. She likes to publish repeat photos of her looking out the window of the aeroplane as she's flying over the basin. Her lack of time on the ground has well and truly been noted. As the Chair of the Speak Up campaign, which is a community organisation based in the Riverina, formed to represent the communities that are directly impacted by the Basin Plan, Mrs Shelley Scoullar, said:

The recent fiasco of information events on the Strategic Water Purchasing Framework has made me want to fight harder than ever to ensure our rural communities are treated with respect and dignity.

This farce, disguised as consultation, again highlighted the lack of 'care factor' from city-based bureaucrats and we cannot allow this to continue without standing up and saying 'that's not good enough'.

The minister for water's lack of interest in engaging with basin communities has been mimicked by her department, who should hang their collective heads in shame that they believe having meetings with only a handful of selected invitees, with invites only sent out the day before, and then hurriedly coordinating a single webinar for those not invited is acceptable. It's an absolute slap in the face for basin communities and the wider Australian community who are and will face further increases in the cost of fresh food like milk, fruit and vegetables if another thousand megalitres of licences are removed from the productive pool, which is what the minister is threatening to do.

To put that volume of water in perspective, the minister is talking about buying back the same volume of water that is currently used in the irrigation districts in South Australia, Sunraysia and the Goulburn-Murray irrigation districts combined. Imagine—if that water were brought out of these regions, their economies would be wiped out. These are economies dependent on irrigation. Australians would be faced with massive increases in the cost of food, and it would probably mean that many of our staples—our dairy products, our fresh fruit and vegetables and our cereals—would have to be imported. You wouldn't be able to buy cow's milk from an Australian dairy to put on your Australian cereal, because you won't get Australian cereal, but you'll probably be able to buy your almond milk, so that'll be okay.

It should be noted that the Victorian Labor government and the New South Wales Labor government have both made it clear that, while they support extensions to the Basin Plan time frames, they do not support buyback. Those states have not changed their previous positions, first agreed to back in 2012 when Tony Burke wrote the Basin Plan. He wrote into the Basin Plan that any moves to recover the additional 450 gigalitres of water had to be done in a socioeconomically neutral manner. This is Labor policy. It enjoyed bipartisan support because it acknowledged the concerns of the communities. But, while the water within the Basin Plan's 2,750 gigalitre recovery targets has been apportioned and the sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism shortfall will be attributed between the states and valleys, the 450 gigalitres are not apportioned. The 450 gigalitres can come from anywhere, and, if it is 450 gigalitres for South Australia, one should argue that it should be 450 gigalitres of South Australian water, because you need to get the water there. Don't forget that there are constraints in the system that limit how effectively you can get environmental outcomes. Until these constraints are dealt with, you're only dribbling water down the river channel. Currently, we've got a crisis in the wine industry. Many wine growers are actually looking and wondering whether they are not better off selling their water and retiring. How will that impact South Australia's Riverland?

I note from the answer to a recent Senate estimates question on notice that the department has done work to model the impact of buying back the shortfall—potentially 750 gigalitres of water—and to recover a million-odd water licences. The government stated that ABARES has done some preliminary work. Previous work done by ABARES in 2020 found that water recovery had added an estimated $72 per megalitre to the temporary water prices in the southern Murray-Darling Basin. If they've done that work, and if it's had that impact, the Albanese government needs to be transparent, show integrity and release the further preliminary work that ABARES has now been done. What will it actually cost taxpayers to recover a million water licences? Some industry experts are estimating up to $20 billion will be needed to recover that water through buybacks. Let's not forget the impact it will have on the water market. It will squeeze the water market further, limit the ability and raise prices for any irrigators remaining in the system.

I want to finish by putting on the record that it is not the coalition who are blocking progress on the Basin Plan. I've repeatedly reached out to the minister offering bipartisan support to a sensible and practical solution. Unfortunately, the minister has not accepted my invitation. I've had one meeting in 16 months, and I have not had a single response to any of my written correspondence. It's frustrating.