Question Time

Water Buybacks

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (14:26): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before addressing a question to the Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development on production loss.

Leave granted.

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: The recent release of the federal Labor government's water and environment agency's draft framework for delivering the 450 gigalitres of environmental water in the basin states:

Basin communities may experience negative social and economic impacts from voluntary water purchases.

Further, the minister's own chief executive has provided evidence that:

If we just buy the water, then there will be loss both on economy and also jobs.

My question to the minister is: given the minister has previously stated in this chamber that she was not aware of any evidence to suggest that buybacks would have a negative impact and, incredibly, that she does not believe that voluntary water purchases would even lead to loss of production, and noting that her federal colleagues and her own department have acknowledged that there may be negative social and economic impacts, does the minister now agree with this view?

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! Minister, do you want to answer the question, or will we get the Hon. Mr Hunter to answer the question? I am not sure.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (14:27): Thank you, Mr President.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! I want to hear the minister.

The Hon. K.J. Maher interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Attorney! Minister, please.

The Hon. K.J. Maher interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: No, you weren't helping.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I thank the honourable member for her question. On 30 November last year, the commonwealth parliament passed the Water Amendment (Restoring our Rivers) Bill 2023. The bill included providing for the commonwealth to enter the water market and undertake a water buyback program. In addition to continued use of productivity-boosting irrigation efficiency measures, the South Australian government has supported the commonwealth's proposed use of strategic water purchases.

What those opposite fail to understand is that this is now necessary to recover the water after years of sabotage and delay. And who were those years of sabotage and delay from? The amendments to the Commonwealth Water Act 2007 and the basin plan specify the social and economic impacts are to be considered in water recovery programs. More specifically, the basin plan stipulates that:

Efficiency contribution to the SDL (sustainable diversion limit) adjustment mechanism must achieve neutral improved socio-economic outcomes.

The Australian government has also committed to minimising socio-economic impacts in delivering the basin plan. Primary Industries and Regions SA and the Department for Environment and Water are working together to provide a pathway for transition which will be achieved by providing advice to the commonwealth government on the design of any buyback program. The departments will be engaging with affected industries and communities to undertake what is incredibly important work.

We come to what those opposite are trying to achieve. We shouldn't be surprised that all the Liberal Party has to offer is scaremongering and political gains. They don't want to talk about what they did in government.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: They certainly don't want to talk—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —about the 10 years—10 years—of delays and sabotage under their federal counterparts. Why is it they don't want to talk about that?

The Hon. I.K. Hunter interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Last year, we saw the member for Hammond taking happy snaps in his electorate—

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order, the honourable Leader of the Opposition!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —with the chief architect of Liberal and Coalition water policy, Barnaby Joyce, joined by the Hon. Laura Henderson, who is in this place. Talk about letting the fox into the henhouse. There he is standing up with Barnaby Joyce, who was the architect of sabotage and delays which have resulted in the threats to the health of the River Murray.

I would have hoped that the member for Hammond and the Hon. Mrs Henderson would have taken the opportunity to express their disappointment at how the former Coalition government and Mr Joyce as former responsible minister shortchanged South Australia by delivering just two of the 450 gigalitres on their watch—just two of the 450 gigalitres. Of course, we should never forget the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. David Speirs, was heavily criticised by the royal commission into the River Murray for capitulating to the interests of the former government, the commonwealth government, and those of Victoria and New South Wales and further accused—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order, both sides!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —of breaching the Ministerial Code of Conduct.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: We are getting to the point I can't hear the minister. I would like the minister to conclude your answer as soon as you can and I want to hear it in silence, please.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: There was a shameful record in the former government. The Leader of the Opposition in this place put out a media release recently, a somewhat reheated version of her release in December, and really I think she should be embarrassed. Her release in December deliberately took a comment by PIRSA chief executive Mehdi Doroudi—

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —out of context to score cheap political points. I would have thought that the health of the Murray should be beyond cheap political pointscoring. Professor Doroudi's comments to the Budget and Finance Committee—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —when read in the context of his entire answer, highlight how sneaky and deceitful those opposite will be to score a political point. The question that was asked: 'Have there been any conversations around compensation for farmers and communities once the legislation is enacted?' Let's listen to all of Professor Doroudi's answer—

The Hon. H.M. Girolamo interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —which was:

At the moment, there is no compensation. As I said, the key point here is: I provide you with the example of the previous program on the River Murray SARMS, the South Australian River Murray Sustainability Program, $250 million; the previous buyback that happened goes back to more than 10 years ago. It was not just simply to go and buy the water: it was a lot of investment also coming through the commonwealth government under the negotiations that we have had with them over water efficiencies and other developments in the region. We are trying to make sure that with the commonwealth we could develop plans and packages similar to SARMS that are going to be beyond just buying the water. If we just buy the water, then there will be loss both on economy and also jobs. It needs to be somehow replaced. That's the plan. That's what we are doing now with the environment department at a state level and also the commonwealth.

The Leader of the Opposition in this place accuses the Malinauskas government of a 'talk first, think later' approach towards the Murray, but what she fails to realise is this: that is exactly what it can look like when state and federal governments instead work together, as opposed to being dictated to as her government was by Barnaby Joyce.

Under those opposite, frankly, 'talk first, think later' would have been an improvement on picking up the phone to Barnaby first and capitulate straightaway. That's what they wanted to do. The Leader of the Opposition made further allegations in her question, again in terms of just trying to suit her own political narrative, and that concerned my answers in in this place.

What she has said in her media release are not words that I have used. I was asked by Mr Basham: 'Is the minister concerned about security of the state's future food needs following buybacks?' I said, 'I am not aware of any evidence to suggest that buybacks would have a negative impact, as the member is implying.' He said then, 'If water is sold back from agriculture into environment, is that not going to lead to the loss of production from the South Australian system if it is bought from South Australia?'

Remembering that we are talking about the evidence, my understanding is that the evidence has not shown that to be the case. I really do find it incredible that the Leader of the Opposition in this place is surprised that this is the kind of work—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —undertaken by departments—

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Point of order.

The PRESIDENT: Minister, the Hon. Mr Simms has a point of order. Sit down, please.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: This is really engrossing, but I want to raise an issue of relevance. I am not sure how this is relevant to the original question.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Mr Simms, your point is well made except I am listening as best I can through the noise, and the minister hasn't strayed away from the issue with the River Murray, which is obviously incredibly important. Minister, I would like you to conclude your remarks because this has gone on nearly long enough, so please finish off and then we can move on to the next question.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I was saying I do find it quite incredible that the Leader of the Opposition in this place is surprised about the kind of work undertaken by departments to fully understand the impacts of policies and decisions. We know the state Liberals in government were dictated to by Barnaby Joyce. My department will work with DEW, with other state agencies and the federal government to support a plan for voluntary buybacks that supports communities.