MURRAY-DARLING BASIN PLAN

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Minister for State Development) (14:11): I seek leave to make a further ministerial statement.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: After the Murray-Darling Basin Authority released its draft plan proposing 2,750 gigalitres of water be returned to the Murray River, South Australia demanded that the authority model the return of 3,200 gigalitres. On 9 October, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority released the results of that modelling which showed definitively that recovering 3,200 gigalitres, an additional 450 gigalitres of water, from the draft plan would make a significant difference in securing the health of the River Murray system.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: The modelling also revealed that by removing system constraints, such as the rules on dam releases that restrict higher flows, benefits to the river can be even further increased. The MDBA's modelling was analysed by the South Australian government scientists and peer reviewed by the Goyder Institute for Water Research. This analysis confirms the many benefits of extra water and that with an extra 450 gigalitres we can have a healthy river. The current draft plan proposes that 2,750 gigalitres of water—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —be returned to the system. However, the science is clear: this is not enough to guarantee a healthy river. Critical tipping points for key measures such as salinity in the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth cannot be avoided with 2,750 gigalitres. Without a clear commitment to this additional water, it would mean locking in the potential for lethal impacts during future droughts and ignoring the need to build resilience into the system so that it can better withstand climate variability in coming years. It would also mean sacrificing the future of basin communities that rely upon a healthy river.

The 3,200 gigalitre modelling with constraints relaxed shows improved environmental outcomes that include: exporting of an average two million tonnes of salt through the Murray Mouth each year; keeping salinity below dangerous thresholds; reducing risk of the Murray Mouth needing to be dredged to remain open; keeping water levels in the Lower Lakes at a level that avoids acidification and river bank collapse below Lock 1; and improved ability for flood plains to support healthy red gum forests, water bird and fish breeding, and greater areas of habitat for native plants and animals.

Still, while increased water volume is critical to the basin's health, it does not by itself address the impacts of overallocation. Additional measures are needed both to optimise the additional water and to recognise South Australia's past responsible water use. This includes measures of safety nets, such as maximum salinity levels and minimum water levels to protect the Coorong and Lower Lakes, a commitment to remove constraints, and an interim watering plan to provide water to degraded environmental sites in South Australia. We also require that South Australia's irrigators do not carry the burden of adjustment in returning the river to health.

It is now imperative that all South Australians who care about this river and the communities who depend upon it get behind our push for this additional 450 gigalitres of water. The real question is whether the opposition can, for just one moment, put aside politics and get behind us in this campaign for 3,200 gigalitres.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!