House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Goulburn-Murray Water Recovery Project GOULBURN-MURRAY WATER RECOVERY PROJECT Mr WILLIAMS House of Assembly MacKillop GOULBURN-MURRAY WATER RECOVERY PROJECT Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (14:33): My question is to the Premier. Why has your government spent $4.1 million of South Australian taxpayers' money on a Victorian water recovery package with water destined for Melbourne from the same area? On 13 November, during questioning on the Auditor-General's Report, it was revealed that the South Australian government has invested state taxpayers' money in the Goulburn-Murray water recovery package. This same water resource is from that which the Victorian government is planning to pipe 75 gigalitres per year over the Great Divide and into Melbourne. The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD House of Assembly Chaffey Minister for the River Murray Minister for Water Security Minister for Regional Development Minister for Small Business Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Trade GOULBURN-MURRAY WATER RECOVERY PROJECT The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD (Chaffey—Minister for the River Murray, Minister for Water Security, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Small Business, Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Trade) (14:33): Dear, oh, dear! I answered this question yesterday. I referred to this question in my previous answer, but for the benefit for the member for MacKillop I will go through it again. There is a project entitled the Living Murray. The Living Murray aims to return 500 gigalitres to the River Murray by 2009. It has been signed up to by New South Wales, Victoria, the ACT, the commonwealth and South Australia. There are five partners in the Living Murray. Mr Williams interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I have warned the member for MacKillop once. He asked his question: the minister is giving a straightforward answer. He is welcome to have another question if he is not satisfied with the answer. But, until such time, he is to sit there in silence The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD House of Assembly The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: The Living Murray project process is that jurisdictions are required to put forward water saving projects to enable them to reach targets that each jurisdiction has to achieve under the 500 gigalitre plan. South Australia has a target of 35 gigalitres; Victoria's is about 214 gigalitres. In Victoria they have put forward a project that has been assessed by the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. It is in the Goulburn-Murray Valley area. It involves a reallocation of water through sales water to take water out of production, and it also involves the decommissioning of Lake Mokoan. That project was assessed through the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. It was ticked off by all the partners, including the state of South Australia and also the federal government. Then what happens under the Living Murray initiative is that each jurisdiction has the opportunity to invest in those projects, and that water saving can then be, I guess, accrued towards the 500 gigalitre goal. South Australia has the opportunity to invest up to 13 per cent in projects interstate. Many of the projects to deliver water savings in the River Murray system will necessitate investment upstream. South Australia has a fabulous track— Mr Williams interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Order! I warn the member for MacKillop a second time. He is on his last call. The Minister for Water Security. The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD House of Assembly The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: The member for MacKillop again puts forward to this house an untruth. The $4.1 million is going to a project that is delivering water savings to the Living Murray initiative. If he wants verification of that go and speak to his Liberal Party colleagues who are also investing in that project. It is supported by the Murray-Darling Basin Commission and the water is going into the Living Murray account for the environment. It is going into the River Murray account, ring-fenced, it is within the cap, it is water that is staying in the environment. Obviously, the member for MacKillop does not live on the River Murray. He has no understanding of River Murray issues, and he has no understanding of what is happening in the Living Murray initiative. It is perhaps about time that he took the time to educate himself.