MURRAY RIVER

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO (15:43): As a final decision by the federal government on the revised Murray-Darling Basin plan draws closer, I feel that it is important to place on the record the work that is being done by this government to secure a better deal for South Australia. As the Treasurer announced in this year's budget, $2 million was set aside for a campaign to help ensure that the health of our most precious resource, the Murray River, is preserved.

It is a campaign that is about showing not just South Australians but, more importantly, those living in the Eastern States, the human faces of the river—those people who would be most adversely affected by the decision to starve the Murray River of the water it requires to stay healthy. This campaign, as I am sure members of this chamber would be well aware, has taken on many forms, including television, radio and print advertising.

In addition to this, there is also the 'River Run' which is a floating campaign, visiting river towns along the length of the South Australian leg of the River Murray to help promote the fight for a healthy river. There is no doubt that this is going to be a tough fight, but it is one that this government has certainly not shied away from.

As it currently stands, the revised Murray-Darling Basin plan, released on 28 May this year, simply does not allocate anywhere near enough water to ensure that the Murray River remains healthy. The plan only sets aside some 2,750 gigalitres of environmental flows, well short of what scientific evidence indicates is required. Not allocating sufficient environmental flows will mean that there would not be enough water flowing down the river to ensure that the mouth of the river remains open.

This in turn would result in the build-up of salt levels to dangerous levels, increasing the risk of permanent damage to the Coorong and the Lower Lakes. We only have to look back to the recent drought, which almost consigned the Coorong to an environmental wasteland, to see the need for improved flows. The damage that could be caused as a result of not providing the additional environmental flows will not be limited to the environment. It will have a detrimental effect on all those communities that rely on the Lower Lakes and the Coorong for their livelihoods, from the fishermen to tourism operators as well as the local farmers.

Many of these communities were on the brink back in the last drought of 2007-08, when many parts of the Lower Lakes had all but dried up. We must keep in mind that, without a Murray-Darling Basin plan that returns the necessary water flows back into the system, those communities are only a few dry years away from a similar fate.

If the decision taken by the federal government does not provide for the necessary water flows back into the river system, it is likely that South Australia, as the Premier has indicated previously, will launch a High Court action against the commonwealth. This would be on the basis that the federal government has not upheld its statutory commitments as set out under the Water Act 2007, which requires it to protect internationally-recognised wetlands such as the Coorong and the Lower Lakes.

I remember speaking on the Murray River during my maiden speech, and one of the first associations I joined when I entered parliament in 1997 was the Murray-Darling Association. Like the majority of South Australians I recognise the important role the river plays in our lives. This campaign shows that this government will leave no stone unturned in its fight to protect the river, the Coorong and the Lower Lakes and the many communities they support throughout South Australia. I will take the liberty of quoting from a recent news release from the Premier, the Hon. Jay Weatherill, as follows:

This generation needs to be able to look our children in the eye and say that when the time came to act we fought for the future of the river and we did everything we could, that we explored every avenue, that we took whatever action was necessary, that we protected our environment, that we protected our food bowl and those who work and live along the river, that our livelihoods were secured, that our constitution was upheld.