HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-03-20 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE: MURRAY-DARLING BASIN WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

The Hon. S.W. KEY (Ashford) (15:44): I move:

That the 76th report of the committee, entitled Water Resource Management in the Murray-Darling Basin Volume Three Postscript—The Return of the Water, be noted.

This postscript report is the fifth report of the Natural Resources Committee on water resources management in the Murray-Darling Basin since the committee first started taking evidence on the topic in November 2007. The Natural Resources Committee recommended in its fourth report tabled in March 2012 that additional hydrological modelling should be undertaken to determine the viability of removing some of the operational constraints that prevent greater quantities of water being made available to the river and South Australia.

The Premier (Hon. Jay Weatherill) established a Premier's task force in November 2011 to coordinate South Australia's response to the draft Murray-Darling Basin Plan. The Natural Resources Committee's role was independent of this task force. The Murray-Darling Basin Authority undertook additional modelling of the likely benefits to the river system for both higher volumes and higher flow rates during 2012.

Federal Minister Tony Burke released the results of the modelling on 9 October 2012. Four scenarios were modelled: returning 2,800 and 3,200 gigalitres per year to the river with unchanged operational constraints, and returning 2,800 and 3,200 gigalitres together with relaxed operational constraints. The modelling showed that by relaxing constraints in the system better environmental outcomes could be achieved for the Lower Lakes, Coorong and Murray Mouth. There were also some benefits to the Riverland-Chowilla flood plain.

The Premier moved a motion in the house on 1 November 2012 supporting the adoption of the basin plan. He emphasised salt export through the mouth, reduced dredging and maintaining water in the Lower Lakes to avoid acidification and river bank collapse. The Premier's motion was carried on 27 November 2012 after extended debate in the house. On 22 November 2012, the federal water minister (Hon. Tony Burke MP) signed the basin plan into law. The plan provides for the return of 2,750 gigalitres to the basin, with an additional 450 gigalitres to be delivered by 2024, giving a total of 3,200 gigalitres per year.

On 26 October 2012, the Prime Minister had already announced that $1.77 billion would be spent over 10 years to secure additional water through on-farm efficiency measures. On 7 February 2013, the federal water minister announced that the Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill had been passed in parliament, securing the additional 450 gigalitres and its associated $1.77 billion funding. The adoption of the basin plan is of course great news, although the delayed targets are disappointing. We can only hope that another major drought does not occur before extra water begins to flow.

We need to recognise that as well as Adelaide, almost every other town and region in the state as far west as Ceduna remains dependant on a healthy river for its water supplies. Committee member and member for Frome, Mr Geoff Brock MP, was always quick to remind us that cities like Port Pirie, Port Augusta and Whyalla would cease to exist without a reliable water supply, and at the present time the Murray is the only source.

South Australia will need to stick to its guns on the need for additional water, because Victoria and New South Wales have said they will oppose the proposed 3,200 gigalitres per year water return in the basin plan. It is easy to forget the dire situation we faced in 2010 before the drought broke. We do not want to ever experience those conditions again. The downside to the proposal is that some riverside shacks in South Australia will be exposed to a higher risk of flooding. That is something we need to be aware of and plan for, bearing in mind that in the past shack areas were regularly flooded. It is only in more recent times that this has not occurred.

I thank all of those who gave their time to assist the committee with this report, and all our other reports. The committee this time around heard from two witness from the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, as well as reviewing documentation provided by the department on the Murray-Darling Basin Authority modelling and South Australia's scientific review of the modelling.

I would like to commend the members of our committee—the member for Frome, the member for Torrens, the member for Little Para, the member for Mount Gambier, the member for Stuart, the Hon. Robert Brokenshire MLC, the Hon. John Dawkins MLC, the Hon. Russell Wortley MLC, and former committee member the Hon. Gerry Kandelaars MLC—for their significant contributions and also their patient work through all the different information we had before us. We all worked cooperatively on this report, and we were greatly assisted by the committee staff. I commend this report to the house.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (15:50): The opposition certainly also supports this report, and as a committee member I am very pleased to have participated in this work—and it was clearly very important work on behalf of the whole east coast of Australia. There were lots of people—lots of committees, government agencies, private people, volunteers, and businesspeople all over the nation—trying to contribute to this solution, and certainly we did our bit, as well.

I say unashamedly that had all the various state and federal governments worked in the same harmony that our bipartisan and cross-party committee worked, solutions would have been reached far sooner. I really do commend my colleagues on this committee and our chair, the member for Ashford, for the way in which we went about this work.

These are complicated and difficult issues, and it has been hard to come up with the right answers, but we did come up with recommendations that we thought were very appropriate. A few months down the track, and I think nearly a couple of years after we started, I still believe that the recommendations we put forward were very sound ones.

The issue that has dogged this whole topic for a very long time has been the competition between states, and I hope that, having had a relatively important day yesterday with the formal adoption of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, some of that will be put behind us. We have a plan, we have to move forward, and we have to do the best we possibly can for the communities and for the environment that rely upon this whole Murray-Darling Basin system.

I would also like to say that I think it is very important to recognise the fact that, quite a few years ago now, it was actually John Howard as prime minister who put $10 billion on the table to try to work towards a solution. I know that it was frustrating for everybody that it took so long, and his initial endeavours were frustrated, but we now do have a plan and we have to move forward. I fear that the competition between the states has not all diminished and that that will be one of the greatest challenges as we all move forward together.

I urge wholeheartedly every single state, every single minister, every premier, every agency and everybody involved in this: stick to the plan, stick to your commitments, and do not withdraw from what you have said you will do, or what your agency or state have said they will do, to try to make this work. If people stick to their commitments, we have a very good chance. If people continue their haggling, we are probably doomed to be back in exactly the same situation once again.

Mr BROCK (Frome) (15:53): I, too, would like to rise and also speak on the 76th report of the Natural Resources Committee on the return of the water. As the other speakers have already indicated, it is a great relief. It is a really great relief to see everything being signed off in the federal government yesterday. It has been very well received by the communities of Port Pirie, Port Augusta, Whyalla and other regions of South Australia that really depend on the health and security of the River Murray to ensure that it is a vibrant and healthy river system, as otherwise we in our regions will not be able to succeed or survive.

I re-endorse the member for Stuart's comments: politicians in other states should have acted as we have in our committee, as a tripartisan group. There was great support with lots of debate, issues, comments and suggestions, but we worked very well. One of the issues that we had was that the end goal was to have a good result for South Australia, and that is what we were looking for. We had no political arguments. Everybody was in agreement with whatever was best for a regional South Australia and South Australia.

When we went out there and took some recommendations from people, from key stakeholders, as would the member for Stuart, I would always tell them that we were from the country. They asked us why we were concerned about the health of the River Murray when we are 200 or 300 kilometres away. Well, that is one of the reasons that we are concerned about the health of the River Murray: to ensure that we have adequate water coming down to have a healthy, vibrant system.

I also congratulate the member for Ashford. She has been a great presiding member of this committee. This is not the first report we have done. We have done many reports, and I will say in this house again that I believe our committee is the hardest working committee in the South Australian parliament—without fail. We take our job very, very seriously. We go out and look at it firsthand and, even though it may be a bit more of a financial burden on the state, we certainly do our job correctly and to the best of our ability.

For too long water in South Australia and Australia has been a political issue, and it gets handballed from one side of government to the other side by political parties. We have to get away from that. We have to start thinking as Australians and not as South Australians, Victorians, New South Wales people, or Queenslanders. We should be looking at the whole of the river system. Unfortunately, South Australia is at the tail end, but we have got a good result out of this.

Again, I commend the member for Ashford for her great leadership and also my other colleagues on this committee. It has been a learning experience, and we are continuing to learn. We worked very well to get a good result out of the final discussion. Thanks also to our staff. Certainly, Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend this report to the parliament.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT