MURRAY-DARLING BASIN PLAN

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (15:14): My question is to Premier Rann. Has your government done an analysis on what impact the guide to the draft Murray-Darling Basin Plan will have on jobs and the social wellbeing of the people and communities along the River Murray in South Australia affected by the proposed basin plan?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! This minister needs a lot of quiet to be heard. He is a gentleman and he expects you to behave accordingly.

The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton—Minister for Environment and Conservation, Minister for the River Murray, Minister for Water) (15:14): Thank you very much for your kind assistance, Madam Speaker. I thank the honourable member for his question. As he would be aware, the guide only came out on Friday and in fact, as I understand it, the first chapter or volume of the guide is all that we have. There is still an enormous amount of information that is yet to be provided by the authority. As of yesterday, and I have not checked today, that was still not on their website and we are awaiting that particular material. In regard to whether we have done an analysis of the socioeconomic consequences of the guide—and I think that was the thrust of the member's question—it is safe to say that at this stage we have not, because it is very early days.

However, I can inform the honourable member that we are committed to working with the irrigators through the trusts and through individual irrigator groups, and we are committed to working with the broader community. We are committed to continuing to work with the scientists to ensure that a robust analysis means that the scientific assumptions of the guide are fully tested. In fact, I also make the commitment today to work with the local member—the member for Chaffey—provided of course that his external body organs are kept intact following that, if he chooses to work with us, and I know that that has worried the member in the past in relation to what he can say, but we welcome—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: No; I am talking about his body organs that he was worried about losing. I am going to stay very disciplined here.

The Hon. J.M. Rankine interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: Mine? No. I am going to stay very disciplined here, because we do want some calmness during this process. We have seen the upper states and the reactions of some of the irrigators from the upstream states. We see this as a once in a hundred years opportunity to address what has been the overallocation of water that has been taken out of the system, a system that is under stress. If this does not result in a proper plan that restores the river system back to health, we then condemn it to a slow death, if not a quick one. We are committed to that. We have been committed from the very start to the establishment of the authority and committed to the establishment of a plan that becomes this nation's plan.

This state is going to work with the people of South Australia to make sure that we have not just adequate input into the plan but certainly expert input into that plan. Where there are flaws—and the authority has admitted that there are some shortcomings and flaws—it is our responsibility to iron out those flaws and to make sure that the plan becomes a better plan than would otherwise be the case because of the involvement that we have had in the further development of that plan. I have asked on numerous occasions for there to be a bipartisan approach to the way in which the state responds to the plan. It is clear to me that some people within the opposition wish to play politics on this particular matter.

Mr Venning interjecting:

The Hon. P. CAICA: It's true, Ivan. It's true. This is about what is in the best interests of the Murray-Darling Basin system, which in turn is going to be in the best interests of South Australia. It is going to be in the best interests of those people who rely on irrigation as the means of their livelihood. As the Premier mentioned earlier, it is not a battle about the environment versus irrigators. It is not a battle between biodiversity and food. It is about making sure that we have security going forward, security in the future for irrigators, security in the future for the environment, and an environment which is sustainable, which in turn means that the means of production that rely on that environment are going to be sustainable.

I look forward to working with the member for Chaffey (and I know that his body parts will be kept intact) and most certainly with the opposition if it chooses to work with the government, just as we are going to work with the Riverland communities, irrigators, trusts and anyone else who is able to ensure that we can have a whole of state, whole of government response to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's draft guide.