Water Recovery Socio-economic Criteria

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:57): My question is to the Minister for Environment. When did the minister make the decision to agree to the changes in the socio-economic criteria?

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Minister for Environment and Water) (14:57): I thank the deputy leader for her question. This was a series of negotiations and work which took place over a lengthy period of time. At the June ministerial council, it was made clear publicly, as I have said—and there was no noise about that at the time—that these socio-economic criteria would be looked at, and a period of time would be spent between senior officials establishing what those criteria could look like before they were presented.

As I have said, I had two options: a pathway towards water or a pathway towards protest. I chose to move towards water. I worked with the senior officials, with academics, with food producers. I worked with many stakeholders across the basin in South Australia as I sought correct advice and canvassed what direction we would head in, and I sought to preserve the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, because we know there was no plan B.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: And what do Labor want to do? They want to blow up the plan.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: Do you know who benefits when you blow up the plan? Do you know who benefits? By blowing up the plan you capitulate to New South Wales and Victoria. We need that plan. Because of the tyranny of the geography South Australia needs the plan, because the plan guarantees that critical water flow. Preserving the Murray-Darling Basin Plan—something that the Labor opposition are not interested in—

Mr Malinauskas interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Leader!

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: —will be a key priority of the Marshall Liberal government.