Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

) ( ): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, Senator Canavan. On Monday, a group of prominent scientists and economists released the Murray-Darling Declaration, showing that there's no scientific evidence that the billions of dollars that taxpayers have spent on water recovery projects under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan have achieved any increase in net stream flows. The Chairperson of the Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations, Fred Hooper, is in the gallery today. On his behalf, I'd like to ask you: why is it that taxpayers and downstream communities are spending billions of dollars and yet the river is still dying?

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Hanson-Young for her question. That is not the government's view. The government's view is not that this plan has not delivered increased water and stream flows to the Murray-Darling system. Indeed, the government so far has already recovered more than a thousand gigalitres of water through buybacks, and we are making progress towards the 2,090-gigalitre amount that will be got to before any adjustment mechanism is set and/or the extra water from the up-water process is factored in. This is a significant achievement for our country, to have established a Basin Plan. It's a plan that went through both houses of parliament many years ago, and we remain fully committed to ensuring the plan is delivered on time and in full. Obviously there are a lot of matters to work out through that process. There remain discussions with the state and territory governments to occur.

I recognise that here in this place the Greens are trying to derail the plan themselves through a number of disallowance motions. The Greens have never been satisfied with a balanced economic, social and environmental outcome in the basin. They have always sought to achieve a figure that would destroy many economic communities and cost thousands of jobs. Indeed, one of the disallowance motions goes to the Northern Basin Review. The Northern Basin Review is something that was kicked off by the former Labor government. It's gone through years of consultation with different groups, looking at the figures, particularly in the northern basin. That review came back saying that we could reduce the recovery in the northern basin by 70 gigalitres and that would save 200 jobs. I think those jobs are pretty important in towns like Collarenebri and Dirranbandi. These places deserve to be considered as well. Now that the MDBA has recommended these changes that are part of the plan, we should all get together as a parliament and see this plan delivered so we can get better environmental outcomes while we think of all of those Australians who rely on the river for their town water and their jobs.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, a supplementary question.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As part of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, we're spending billions of dollars of taxpayers' money on what is meant to be improving flows for the environment, but as much as 75 per cent of surface diversions are not even metered. How on earth can you be sure that taxpayers are getting value for money and that the water that you've bought back is actually there?

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I've said, while the Greens are trying to derail this plan, we are committed to ensuring that the recommendations of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, the independent statutory agency, are met. I remember that, when the MDBA first released an exposure draft to the original plan, the Greens were supporting the MDBA because they came up with a position that they wanted.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Canavan, please resume your seat. Senator Hanson-Young, a point of order?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order on relevance, Mr President. I asked about the metering of water diversions, and the minister hasn't responded.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the minister of the question regarding the metering and the flows.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. We are confident that the plan will be delivered according to the recommendations of the MDBA, and we are committed to ensuring the independence of that organisation. The Greens want to have it both ways. When an independent body recommends something they agree with, they want to sign up to it and use that independence as a crutch for their arguments. When that same independent body has a different view, they then criticise it and want to derail it. You can't have it both ways. We want to commit to this plan and we want to deliver it in a bipartisan way, working with the states. Doing so will be good for the environment.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, a final supplementary question?

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My final supplementary question goes to the Northern Basin Advisory Committee's final report to the government on the Murray Darling Basin Authority. In that report they say, 'Current compliance regimes are poorly resourced and ineffective.' This is the government's own advisory body. How on earth can you be assured that upstream irrigators aren't ripping off the taxpayer?

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, I am aware of a number of investigations state governments have launched, both in Queensland and New South Wales. As you are probably aware, there's been a major review in New South Wales into compliance by Mr Ken Matthews, who is a very respected policy analyst in this area. We are fully committed to working with the state and territories to improve their systems as a result of those inquiries. We will be working to make sure that that occurs.

As I said earlier, the northern basin review the senator referred to was the result of four years of consultation. It was kicked off by the former Labor government. It is making recommendations that we are committed to implementing. It will save 200 jobs. It will mean that we can protect the environment and deliver the objectives of the Basin Plan, as well as making sure we do so in a way that minimises that economic impact. We think that parties here should try and commit to this because it's a once-in-a-generation opportunity to get together and work for the betterment of the basin. (Time expired)