Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, and it relates to the water summit being held tomorrow. I note that the Queensland government has now, also, belatedly, been invited to that summit. My question goes to the approach the federal government is taking into the summit. Does the federal government believe that water is currently seriously over allocated—and is it prepared to do something to tackle that problem—and that unless water is properly priced it will not be used and allocated efficiently? Will the federal government ensure that there will not be a reduction in allocation for environmental flows, as has been called for by some local government authorities in the area?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said in my answer to an earlier question, the government does treat the issue of the drought, and particularly the pressure on the Murray-Darling Basin system, as very serious, and therefore has called a meeting with the relevant premiers and water ministers to discuss what options are open to governments jointly to seek to ameliorate the worst impacts of the drought on water supplies, essentially to irrigators and towns along the river and those who rely on the Murray-Darling Basin for their livelihoods.

It must, of course, be remembered, that there are interesting constitutional issues at stake here—given that the fact of the Constitution is that the Commonwealth does not have the primary responsibility for water—but increasingly, because of the obvious fact that rivers and water involve more than one state, the Commonwealth has been taking a role in seeking to ensure as cooperative an approach as is possible is taken to the careful stewardship and management of our water resources within the constitutional restraints.

I think it is accepted on all sides that, over the course certainly of the postwar period, there have been excessive calls upon our river system, that perhaps too many licences have been issued with too little recognition of the costs thereto and to the environment, at prices that do not reflect that cost. You cannot blame the irrigators or the farmers for that. If you are offered a licence, you quite properly and sensibly are going to take it. With the benefit of hindsight, I think it is now conceded on all sides that far too many licences were issued, particularly in the postwar period, and the pressure on the Murray-Darling Basin has been too great. The reality is that any number of communities have now developed around those arrangements and many livelihoods are dependent upon those arrangements. Unwinding those arrangements sensibly and in a mature fashion in the interests of the communities, the industries and the Murray-Darling Basin itself is going to take very careful management and, no doubt, the investment of resources on the part of taxpayers at the Commonwealth and state levels. From our point of view, we are doing that.

The Commonwealth has committed substantial sums of money to that. So far—I stand to be corrected—we have put in place arrangements to enable irrigators to seek to sell back into the system their trading rights to water. We are not contemplating compulsion in this area but we are very conscious of the demands on the river and its incapacity to meet those demands at the moment. This is a terrible situation facing many communities along the Murray River and the industries that are dependent upon it. I am glad all the Labor state premiers are attending the meeting tomorrow in a spirit of goodwill so that we can attempt to fashion some sensible responses to what is really a crisis.

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Could the minister clarify the part of my question which he did not answer, which was whether the Commonwealth would ensure there is no reduction in environmental flows as a consequence of tomorrow’s meeting, as has been called for by some local government authorities? Would the minister also indicate whether the water trading regime, which is planned to start from mid next year, will require realistic pricing of water? Can he also indicate, given that climate change will almost certainly lead to more prolonged droughts, high evaporation and reduced rainfall, whether tomorrow’s water crisis summit will include discussion about the need for state as well as federal governments to do more to meet the threat of climate change?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Tomorrow’s meeting is to be about the current drought that Australia is experiencing and the pressure that is putting on the Murray-Darling Basin, and what forecasts of very low water levels in storage dams will mean for those dependent upon them. It is not a general summit about climate change. As to the specific questions that preceded that last reference by Senator Bartlett, I think it better that I get some information for him as soon as I can and report back to him.