Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Brandis, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. The Deputy Prime Minister has told South Australia that the previously agreed 450 gigalitres in recovery of environmental water for the Murray-Darling cannot now be delivered because, he says, there would be 'significant social and economic detriment'. Given the Prime Minister's statement today, where he said, 'We are committed to the Basin Plan. We're committed to ensuring that we do the right thing by the environment, the right thing by irrigation communities,' does the minister acknowledge that the funds in the Water for the Environment Special Account can and should be used according to section 86AD(2)(c)(ii) of the Water Act, using the act's wording 'address any detrimental social or economic impact on the wellbeing of any community in the Murray-Darling Basin so as to offset any such impact'? Minister, what detailed consideration and planning has the government undertaken to ensure the special account is used as intended in the act? Will the minister table all such documents relating thereto?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Senator Xenophon, and thank you for your courtesy in giving my office advance notice of the question. I do not think you were in the chamber, Senator Xenophon, when a question was asked of the relevant minister, Senator Canavan, by the opposition. Senator Canavan in his answer gave a very, very detailed exposition of the government's position, and I would commend it to you.

But in any event, Senator Xenophon, as the Prime Minister stated this morning, we are committed to the Basin Plan, we are committed to the environment and we are also committed to doing the right thing by irrigators. We are committed to delivering the plan in full. The conditions around the expenditure of the Water for the Environment Special Account are that it must be used in accordance with the intergovernmental agreement agreed to by jurisdictions, including your state of South Australia. The additional 450 gigalitres must be recovered through efficiency improvements, with neutral and improved social and economic impacts—a point made by Senator Ruston, the Assistant Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, in her letter to the Premier of South Australia on 20 November. The measures are dependent on the voluntary participation of irrigators and water users. The act, and the intergovernmental agreement, which are both public documents, determine how the funding can be spent.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Pause the clock. Point of order, Senator Xenophon?

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Attorney has not addressed section 86AD(2)(c)(ii) of the act, which relates to offsetting any such impact. He has addressed other issues relating to the act, but not the particular subsection of the act that I referred to.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Xenophon. There were three elements to your question. That was one element—and the minister did refer you to Senator Canavan's answer also. I will allow the minister to continue.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So, as I said, Senator Xenophon, the act—including section 86AD(2)(c)(ii)—and the IGA, both of which are public documents, determine how the funding can be spent, including the arrangements for offsetting, as you say, under section 86AD(2)(c)(ii). The government will comply with the act, and it will respect and honour the intergovernmental agreement. (Time expired)

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Xenophon, a supplementary question.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Does the Attorney concede that the Commonwealth government as holder of the special account, with almost $2 billion in it, can drive water efficiency measures to achieve the 450 gigalitres agreed to, in cooperation with the states? What steps has the government actually undertaken to request the basin states to provide details of such projects? And I ask again: will the minister table all such documents relating to that?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Xenophon, as I said in answer to your initial question, the key documents here are public agreements. But can I also point out to you that basin governments have already agreed to pursue 450 gigalitres of additional water for the environment. The Commonwealth has established programs through which water users and state governments can pursue funding for the efficiency measures.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Xenophon, a final supplementary question.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, that is contrary to the Deputy Prime Minister's statement to the South Australian government.

Has the government commissioned any modelling on the impact of not reaching the 450 gigalitres target, of abandoning that target, on the health of the river system, particularly in the lower reaches of the Murray? Has the government actually sought advice from the CSIRO and other scientists as to whether it can reduce the return of water from 3,200 gigalitres to 2,750 gigalitres and not increase the risk to the river's health when the next drought hits?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Xenophon, your question is based on the premise that the government is abandoning part of the plan. The government is not abandoning any part of the plan.