Annette Hurley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong. Can the minister advise the Senate what steps the government is taking to provide for the water security of the people of the Murray-Darling Basin? Is the minister aware of any threats to the government’s actions?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Hurley for her question and her continued interest and work in the context of water policy. Since gaining office 12 months ago, the Rudd government has made significant progress in strengthening and improving water security in this country. Senators will be aware of the government’s $12.9 billion long-term plan, Water for the Future, which is all about preparing Australia for a future with less rain as a result of climate change.

We all know that the most pressing water security challenge that Australia faces is in the Murray-Darling Basin. We know that years of mismanagement, overallocation, drought and climate change have taken their toll on the Murray, and we have had 37 consecutive months of below average inflows into the Murray. We also know that what is needed is a new approach. I want to quote the Leader of the Opposition, who, when he was a minister, said this:

The principal problem with the Murray-Darling Basin has been that it’s never had a basin-wide plan. It’s never been run as one.

We in the government are delivering on what Mr Turnbull said was needed. We have forged an agreement with the states which is about, for the first time, running the Murray-Darling Basin, managing that basin, as a whole of basin—exactly what Mr Turnbull said was needed.

But of course the question is whether or not this historic agreement is threatened by the same people—those on the other side—who were unable to deliver any progress on the Murray for their entire 12 years in government. We know that there is division on the other side between those who are more sensible about this issue and those who want to play short-term political games with the long-term future of the Murray-Darling Basin. What we know is that we will see again in this place, just like we did on the carbon sinks, debate over whether those on the other side will in fact back Mr Turnbull, because it was Mr Turnbull who recognised that a basin-wide approach was required. (Time expired)

Annette Hurley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister outline to the Senate how the government intends to ensure that towns and cities around the Murray-Darling Basin have the water that they need?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very happy to answer this because the agreement that was reached with the first ministers means that for the first time in Commonwealth legislation the critical human water needs of those who rely on the Murray-Darling are secured. It ensures that people who need the water for drinking and sanitation are the priority. In addition, industry that needs water to remain viable will get it. What could possibly be wrong with that? You will have to ask the Liberal South Australian senators, such as Senator Minchin, Senator Birmingham or Senator Fisher, because they voted in this place to remove those provisions—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, resume your seat. When we have order, we will proceed with question time.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They voted in this place to remove the provisions which would have provided the security that is needed for those towns and cities that rely on the Murray-Darling for their water. (Time expired)

Annette Hurley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. In particular, can the minister outline to the Senate how the people of Adelaide will benefit from the government’s plans?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very grateful to Senator Hurley, who lives in Adelaide, for the question. For the first time, the legislation that the government is proposing to put in place, subject to the parliament carrying it, will ensure not only that priority is given to the critical human needs of those towns and cities which rely on the Murray-Darling—we know that Adelaide in particular is reliant on the Murray—but also that issues such as conveyance water and upstream storage are dealt with. That means that we are more able to safeguard Adelaide’s water supply. That is what this agreement means.

What is putting this at risk is the game-playing on the other side. Really, this ends up being a matter for Mr Turnbull. Mr Turnbull said on Adelaide radio today that you will pass the bill. The question is whether Mr Turnbull can ensure that his troops deliver—or will we see a repeat of yesterday, where we saw a split in the coalition on this issue?

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. I ask if you would look at the answer being given to that question and at standing order 73(2). Perhaps, after consideration, you could see whether it is within standing orders to anticipate discussion on a matter that is still to be debated in the chamber.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong has the call.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying, the issue is whether those on the other side will actually sign up to what they said they would. (Time expired)