Question Time

MURRAY-DARLING BASIN

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (14:09): My question is to the Minister for Water Security.

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: Has the so-called historic agreement over the future management of the Murray-Darling Basin, and in particular the fact that a whole of basin plan will not be established until 2011, disadvantaged South Australia? On Tuesday, the government, through a press release titled 'SA seeks an explanation on new Victorian water plan', states in regard to the Victoria Northern Region Sustainable Water Strategy:

The strategy proposes a number of policies that could potentially impact the River Murray in South Australia, particularly the reliability of both our regulated and unregulated flows.

It goes on to state:

South Australia is also concerned that implementation of the Victorian strategy may be accelerated and would pre-empt and adversely impact the development of the new basin-wide plan by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority.

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD (Chaffey—Minister for the River Murray, Minister for Water Security) (14:10): First and foremost, I am pleased to see that the opposition is reading the press releases, because that is exactly what my press release states: South Australia has substantial concerns about the Victorian government's sustainability regions.

An honourable member interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: It would be particularly useful if the opposition would, at last, start to come on board with the state government in fighting the war against the Eastern States on water related issues. The opposition in this state continually tries to internalise these problems instead of actually taking—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: —a proactive role in ensuring that South Australia can show—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for MacKillop!

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: —bilateral support for a campaign against the other states to get a better deal for South Australia. Now to the basin-wide plan and to the new Murray-Darling Basin agreement. This is historic. I can assure—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: —members opposite that the status quo was unacceptable. What the opposition would have us believe is that we should have abandoned this new authority, abandoned progress towards a new basin-wide plan, and that we should have held out for something better. They would have actually denied this state the benefit of having work commence on a basin-wide plan that will set new caps on the extraction of water, not only surface water but, for the first time, also groundwater.

What has happened that is too late is that previous governments failed to act on this 20 and 30 years ago. Previous federal governments have taken no interest in this at a national level. It is only during the last couple of years—

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I warn the member for MacKillop.

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: —that we have finally seen the federal government take an interest in the Murray-Darling Basin. It is only since Malcolm Turnbull put a national plan for water security on the table that the federal government—in the dying days of the previous government—decided to even consider that water was of importance. The dying days. I would like to put on the record that at that time Malcolm Turnbull and John Howard—

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Hammond is warned.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I do not need the assistance of the member for Finniss, thank you. The minister has the call.

The Hon. K.A. MAYWALD: Members of this house would be well reminded that at the time that Malcolm Turnbull released his national plan for water security his solution was for the Murray-Darling Basin Commission to be dissolved into a government agency reporting to one federal minister. The South Australian government did not support this. We lobbied extremely hard to have an independent authority established so that we could start to take the politics out of the management of the Murray-Darling Basin.

The Howard government did not support an independent authority initially. We had to drag it to the table to support an independent authority so that future decisions on establishing caps within the Murray-Darling Basin on surface water and groundwater could be based on science and not politics. We were successful in getting all jurisdictions to accept that an independent authority was the most significant step forward in ensuring that we could get a basin-wide plan that would be borderless.

This is a huge step forward. Yes, it should have been done 20 years ago. Guess what: who was in government 20 years ago? Guess what: it is successive governments of South Australian persuasion (both Liberal and Labor) that have fought hard to get a better deal for the River Murray. We have continually done it in a bipartisan manner, decade after decade, until we now have this opposition. This opposition continues to try to drive a wedge within our communities at the expense of our communities. Come on board. Show bipartisan support to get a better deal for the River Murray across the board. That is what you should be doing; that is what the people of South Australia expect you to be doing. Show some leadership, rather than the kind of nonsense that we see going on in the press at the moment.