HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-08-02 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Matter of Urgency

Murray-Darling Basin Plan

The PRESIDENT (14:28): The Hon. Ms Franks has informed me in writing that she wishes to discuss a matter of urgency in regard to the fact that:

A healthy River Murray is vital to South Australia's future and the basin plan must be delivered on time and in full. We as South Australian parliamentarians stand united for our River Murray and in support of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. We call on the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, to commission a fully independent judicial inquiry into the allegations raised on Four Corners, in order to be sure that the basin plan is not undermined and will continue to deliver our share of water to South Australia.

In accordance with standing order 116, it will be necessary for three members to stand.

Honourable members having risen:

As that number have risen in their place, it is proof of the urgency of the matter. I call upon the Hon. Ms Franks.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (14:28): I move:

That the council at its rising do adjourn until Thursday 3 August 2017 at 1pm.

Before councillors think we are getting the afternoon off, the reason we are voting on a motion of a matter of urgency to stop the work of this parliament is that, of course, we know that river flows are being stopped to our state, and indeed to others, such as those communities in Broken Hill, not through need but through greed.

So, I move this motion that will not go on the record as anything but an adjournment motion, so we can stand together here in this council, across our party divides, standing up for the state of South Australia and reiterate the words of the President that we stand because:

A healthy River Murray is vital to South Australia's future and the basin plan must be delivered on time and in full. We as South Australian parliamentarians stand united for our River Murray and in support of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. We call on the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, to commission a fully independent judicial inquiry into the allegations raised on Four Corners, in order to be sure that the basin plan is not undermined and will continue to deliver our share of water to South Australia.

Mr President, all members would be aware of the work of Four Corners in exposing the corruption that is alleged to be taking place upstream from this state. Having said that, water is, of course, our most important natural resource, so I think there is no greater need for a matter of urgency to be discussed by this council than on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and the River Murray.

I note that the last time this measure was employed was November 2008 by the Hon. Rob Brokenshire, for a debate also on the River Murray. Times have changed and we are no longer in that particular weather condition, and we are no longer in drought in South Australia, but the crisis remains and the urgency stands. We have seen a huge consolidation by two big players upstream, and it is not lost on me that Chris Corrigan, the man who was responsible for smashing the waterfront workers, is smashing our waterways now.

There is plundering afoot and there are allegations that must be investigated, and they must be independently investigated and urgently so, and all states must stand united, committed to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. We will stand alongside all cross-parties and with the ACF, traditional owners and our farming communities in the fight to keep the mighty Murray River flowing.

When it was agreed, the basin plan package was endorsed by all basin governments, and by a bipartisan vote in both houses of federal parliament. It aims to recover 3,200 gigalitres of water for the environment, but, since that basin plan was agreed on, some basin governments have tried to change the rules to allow the inclusion of dodgy off-set projects that would mean that species and habitats miss out on vital flows.

The Greens are committed to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. Australia is already seeing positive outcomes from the plan, including improved freshwater flows. These keep the Murray Mouth open and wetlands replenished, leading to healthier vegetation and increased numbers of water birds and fish. The plan has been a crucial step towards improving environmental outcomes from our water systems, but we must do more. As it stands, I remind members of this council that the current plan only provides the bare minimum of water required to keep the Murray Mouth open and the Coorong alive. It still leaves many wetlands and native species at risk.

We also know, from the Greens' perspective, how crucial the Murray-Darling Basin is for Australia's food production and economy. We support reforms to keep the system healthy all the way up from the Murray Mouth, from the source to the sea. Winding back the overallocation of water and restoring our precious ecosystem so that they can keep sustaining our nation is essential. We want to see the return of water to environmental flows and to cultural flows.

We want reforms that will assist all basin communities to build their jobs and economies and to restore our internationally-recognised wetlands and productive agricultural areas to good health. This is a key reform facing Australia over the next decade and we have to get it right, not just for South Australians but for all Australians.

Members would be aware that my mum lives upstream of us, and, indeed, lives in cotton country that is either in drought or flood. Those communities there know full well at the moment the challenges that are besetting our reliance on water-intensive crops, such as cotton and rice. I stand with my mum's community on this. She might not be South Australian, but we are all Australians and the water is too important not to get right.

I note that there is a need for independent oversight of water management, and it has been brought to the fore, not just for that water management to be there on an ongoing basis but for the independent judicial inquiry powers, to make sure that the plan is being delivered as it was meant to be. We need transparent institutions that we can trust to look after our rivers. The Greens add our voice to that call here today, and we urge all members of this council to work together to see that effected.

I spoke about this issue quite recently as a matter of importance but I bring this motion here today to the Legislative Council so that we can all show our support for struggling communities throughout the entire basin that continue to experience water shortages or the flows upon which they rely completely drying up even when there is not a drought. As if that was not enough, low flows or absence of flow exposes acid sulphate soils to the air and increases salinity levels.

Furthermore, two million tonnes of salt washes out of the soil into the Murray-Darling system. This should be diluted by fresh water and flushed out of the Murray Mouth, but without sufficient flow this salt instead chokes the system from the bottom up. It is often said that a river dies from its mouth. This, in particular, threatens the water supply in Adelaide and the South Australian Riverland communities. Looking after the River Murray and all who depend on it requires long-term thinking and strong leadership, and that is what I hope we are showing here today—that strong leadership.

This has been severely lacking. Some rogue irrigators and their political backers are trying to water down the plan. I echo the words that were said earlier this week by one of the irrigators who noted that some of these irrigators are akin to bank robbers. That does not mean that all irrigators are bank robbers, and the Greens are certainly cognisant of the fact that not all irrigators are doing the wrong thing. What needs to happen now is for those who are doing the wrong thing to be punished, and we need to have trust in a transparent plan.

I will not spend too much longer speaking today because I know there are many members who wish to speak to this motion. However, I cannot help but remark on the lack of leadership shown so far by Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce on this matter. I understand that strong words may have been uttered outside of this place and I hope some strong words of a different flavour might be uttered inside our councils and chambers in parliaments across this country in the hope of better leadership at a federal level on this matter.

Indeed, in my heart, Senator Leyonhjelm holds a special place for accusing South Australians of 'getting our knickers in a twist over this issue'. I say to people such as Senator Leyonhjelm and Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce: we have got our knickers in a twist and if you are not careful those knickers will not be made of cotton for much longer from your upstream states. With those few words, I commend the motion.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS (Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety) (14:37): The Murray River is critical to our state's future. We do not just rely on it for our drinking water—a healthy river is the backbone of our agricultural, tourism and industrial sectors. We understand how precious water is in South Australia. South Australians fought hard for the basin plan in 2012. We fought to have 3,200 gigalitres of water returned to the Murray-Darling river system, which is vital to the long-term health and security of the river system.

It has became obvious that this plan is now under serious threat from the Liberal National government. Our irrigators and communities need the plan delivered as promised, on time and in full. What makes things worse is that the federal government, which should be leading delivery of this plan, will instead join the conspiracy and dishonesty of the upstream Eastern States to dud us on our agreement. Our federal water minister has, time and time again, shown his only allegiance is to his rice and cotton farming mates.

It is easy to forget now, but the effects of the millennium drought on South Australians were extreme. The extreme low flows during the drought caused widespread problems. City, town and rural water supplies were threatened. Water restrictions were rolled out for all River Murray water users in the state. This included sprinklers being banned at one point and the government had to contemplate the use of bottled water.

Allocations to South Australia's irrigators were well below any historical levels, creating economic hardship for irrigation-dependent communities. Some irrigators could not access the water that was available due to low water levels below Lock 1. There were extreme adverse impacts on tourism and recreation which flowed onto businesses and communities along the river and around the Lower Lakes.

Communities and individuals suffered significant financial, social and personal hardship, and some have not yet fully recovered. Meningie and the Riverland are examples of communities that are still rebuilding, both socially and financially. Thirty-three wetlands were cut off from the river to save water, risking long-term damage to the ecosystem. Riverbanks broke away and collapsed; lives and properties were at risk; and soil, trees and even vehicles collapsed into the water with little or no warning.

The Lower Lakes began to dry up and became highly saline, and parts of the Coorong became five times saltier than the sea. In 2009, salinity levels in Lake Alexandrina reached 6,000 EC, and almost 20,000 EC in Lake Albert, well over the 1,400 level drinking water limit. Up to 20,000 hectares of acid sulphate soils were exposed in the Lower Lakes region, generating the same acid as in a car battery, and bringing this region to the brink of environmental catastrophe. The Lower Murray swamps is an example of an area that is still recovering, and it will take decades to recover. Internationally important migratory bird numbers in the Coorong have drastically diminished.

At the peak of the drought, the situation for South Australia was dire: flows across the South Australian border fell to just 960 gigalitres per year; Adelaide was placed on level 3 water restrictions; irrigators started 2007-08 and 2008-09 with the lowest starting allocation on record, just 2 per cent; low water levels caused riverbank collapse along the river below Lock 1; salinity reached record levels, damaging ecosystems and threatening water supplies for people and livestock; and Aboriginal communities suffered the exposure of ancient burial grounds. The cost of managing the drought, along with tourism revenue losses, has been estimated at over $790 million, and this is likely to be an underestimate as not all costs could be quantified.

It is important for all Australians to understand how dire this situation was, particularly for our state. South Australians understand this more than any other jurisdiction because South Australians lived this experience. At the end of the day, we are talking about people and the livelihood that a healthy and functioning Murray-Darling Basin river system brings. South Australia has stared into the abyss of loss that results from the overallocation of water exacerbated by severe drought. Our communities have seen what is at stake and what could be lost as a result of not redressing the balance.

As Senator Bernardi said earlier this week, 'It is a rare occasion where you see the disparate voices representing South Australia standing together to represent the interests of South Australia.' The Four Corners program has demonstrated that South Australians are not getting a fair deal. What has been uncovered is scandalous. South Australia has played by the rules and our communities have done the hard work required of them under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

It is an enormous betrayal to discover that upstream states have been wilfully and flagrantly betraying, flouting and undermining an agreement that the Murray-Darling river system depends on for its long-term sustainability and security. South Australians have the right to be upset. They have a right to be angered, and they certainly have a right to call for an independent judicial inquiry to get to the bottom of these incredibly serious water theft allegations.

The New South Wales government wants us to believe that they can handle this through an internal review, a review with conveniently narrow terms of reference that will only examine water theft over a four-day period in 2015. When more than one billion litres of water has been stolen from the river system; when there are allegations of long-term and systemic gaming of the water rules and noncompliance in New South Wales; and when there are allegations of Public Service corruption of the highest level in the Department of Primary Industries, we can say that nothing short of the independence and transparency of a judicial inquiry will do. This government has always stood up and fought for the Murray-Darling river system and the South Australian communities who depend upon it, and we will always continue to do so.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (14:44): I rise to make some comments in support of this motion and echo many of the sentiments that have been uttered already about the tragic circumstances in which the Murray-Darling has found itself in the past and in particular the impact on South Australia. Many of us who have been in this parliament for some time have spoken at length about the Murray-Darling and its calamities. In particular, I spoke about the impact on the areas close to the Murray Mouth in the Lower Lakes and Coorong when I spoke to the motion recognising Mr Henry Jones, who was a champion of the river system and a significant catalyst in ensuring that in 2012 the plan was developed and written into law.

The plan is the plan. It is the law. The Prime Minister has said a number of times that it will be delivered in full, and COAG has also recommitted, in recent meetings, to delivering it in full. It is the law that 2,750 gigalitres be returned by 2019 and an additional 450 gigalitres, I understand, by 2024. It has been confirmed several times.

In terms of the checks and balances, I think we are all pleased that Senator the Hon. Anne Ruston is the assistant minister, who clearly represents South Australia. She is from Renmark and clearly understands the issues at a local level. The Hon. Neil Andrew is the chair of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority.

As Tracy Hill, who is a fisherperson near the Coorong, said quite recently in relation to the plan, 'It's the only plan we've got and people sweated blood for it.' I think that acknowledges the difficulty and that all parties, all states had to make sacrifices in order to reach agreement on the plan. I think there is no secret that there are some stakeholders upstream who would love to see the plan torn up, and constantly in their fantasies would like to revisit it.

I remember fairly early on in having this portfolio attending a Murray Darling Association AGM at Goolwa. Senator the Hon. Simon Birmingham was asked by one of the members there—and for the benefit of members, the MDA represents councils along the length of the river—about whether elements of the plan could be changed. He was unequivocal in saying that this was the plan and it was his government's intention to deliver it.

There was a Senate inquiry quite recently, which I think undermined the confidence in the plan. I would just like to quote from the local state member who represents the Coorong and Lower Lakes area, Mr Adrian Pederick, the member for Hammond. Referring to Senator Leyonhjelm, he said:

…on top of the disgrace that's happened in New South Wales…I attended the meetings at Goolwa in regards to the Senate committee and it was just farcical that the committee never took any notice of what was said and other submissions that were put in since then about the simple fact that Lake Albert and Lake Alexandrina have been fresh for over 90 per cent of the time. And the whole reason that the barrages went in was because of offtakes upstream, and they went in…90 years ago. It is just…the contempt that some people show, and you can see comments by Brewarrina, Broken Hill, you can see that New South Wales are pulling themselves apart from what's going on in regards to the alleged theft of water on cotton farms in New South Wales. And…we have to have a freshwater recovery for the River Murray to make sure that two million tonnes of salt annually gets flushed down so that everyone gets productive use. If Senator Leyonhjelm wants the River Murray to go back to nature, that would mean…not only pulling out the barrages but 3,500 other structures, putting in thousands of kilometres of man-made channels, and that wouldn't benefit any irrigator in the whole River Murray system throughout Australia. It is just a ridiculous statement that he keeps making.

He continues. He is clearly a very passionate advocate for his region. Four Corners has aired some very disturbing allegations about corruption and water theft in the Barwon-Darling water district, which is part of the northern systems. I think everyone is in full agreement that these allegations need to be fully investigated and prosecuted, if breaches of the law can be demonstrated. I might add too, that it is not just South Australia, it is also Broken Hill and the Menindee Lakes that are affected because that is where these particular river systems feed into.

The Four Corners journalist mentioned that they spoke to someone at a town called Louth who was worried about having water just to be able to shower and brush her teeth and water her cattle. I think that demonstrates some of the huge concern that people along the system have. It is for those reasons we believe the community's confidence rests in having an independent inquiry. I understand that, under the current rules, the state agencies investigate such allegations, but it certainly seems like Caesar investigating Caesar.

Phillip Glyde, who is the CEO of the authority, has referred to amendments to improve the legal system in terms of prosecuting. In light of all this, he said quite recently that they have done a review and in November last year the plan was amended to try to get better protection of environmental water, which has been out for public comment. All ministers signed on to the toolkit principles to better protect environmental water and he was obviously pleased with that outcome. He also made a comment, which I think underlines the need for an independent inquiry, saying:

The bottom line is, we can't have noncompliance with the rules that is corrosive and undermines trust in the plan.

I certainly agree with those sentiments. I think everybody is concerned that the current process may be being undermined. People can argue about whether the volume is significant or where it flows to, but I think, for the sake of the entire system, and particularly in South Australia, we do need an independent inquiry and therefore we are supporting this motion.

In relation to the multiparty party that took place on the weekend with a range of cross-parties, the Liberal Party was the only one that was not invited. Just in case anybody is unsure as to why we were not part of that, it is because we were clearly left off the dance card. From our point of view, that is very disappointing. I do not think anybody even phoned anybody on our side of parliament to ask whether we might like to join them or not.

Clearly, the state Liberal Party has very strong support for the current basin plan. We have insisted many times that it be delivered on time and in full and we remain committed to that position.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Employment, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for Science and Information Economy) (14:53): I rise to support this motion and I thank the honourable member for bringing it to us today. Many on this side, and indeed in this chamber, have fought long and hard to protect the River Murray. It is a fight that crosses over the colour of politics and right across this country. It unites us in a common purpose for the health of our river and the future of South Australia.

It was a long road to get the Murray-Darling Basin Plan as it was agreed to. As the Hon. Michelle Lensink said, it was not easy to get over different state's interests and to stop the fight between states, but it was done and it was done by working together. It was done by putting aside differences and uniting to protect the River Murray. No one state got absolutely everything they wanted, but what we did get is an historic agreement, a plan to protect the River Murray, a plan that sees the water flow, and a plan that supports irrigators. We got the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

Sadly, that is under threat because of the short-sightedness of the federal Coalition, particularly the Deputy Prime Minister. Putting Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce in charge of the water portfolio has done a great deal of damage. It is selling out the river. You can say many things about former prime minister Tony Abbott in regard to Holden or in regard to building submarines overseas, but he never sold out the river to the National Party. Despite what he said in opposition about the river, as prime minister Tony Abbott did not hand the water portfolio over to a National Party member. He left it with the environment and not with the agriculture portfolio, and he did not leave the plan to a member of the National Party who has form in making statements not too dissimilar from what we have seen.

It is the current Prime Minister who has put the Murray under threat because he put Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce in charge. Very early on we all had a taste of what Barnaby Joyce thought of the River Murray and of South Australia. In 2010, in response to South Australian concerns, Barnaby Joyce famously recommended to South Australian irrigators that they, 'move to where the water is'.

Everyone knows what he thinks of this plan. It is no secret that he went up and down the river trying to stop the plan from getting up, telling different things to different people and whipping up fear. There is often contempt for the plan from Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, and he continues to do all he can to undermine it. If anyone needed any further evidence, then they just need to look at what he said in a pub in Shepparton last week amongst what he thought were his irrigator mates. He said, 'The Murray-Darling Basin Plan, $13 billion invested in it—we have taken water and put it back into agriculture so we can look after you and make sure we don't have the greenies running the show.' He added:

That was a hard ask but we did it and we are going to try, and even last night, a couple of nights ago on Four Corners, you know what that's all about, it's about them trying to take more water off you, creating a calamity, a calamity for which the solution is they're going to take more water off you, shut more of your towns down and I am glad it is in our portfolio, the National Party portfolio.

This is what the federal Liberal Party has done. This is the person they have put in charge of the river, the river that crosses so many states around Australia.

Today, 2 August, we saw another damning media report emerge in New South Wales about the handling of this. Today's headline in the Daily Telegraph read, 'Nats and the water rats. Minister tries to change water laws after the farmers given extra river rights'. It is more worrying evidence of the complete disregard there seems to be in New South Wales for the plan. It would appear that extends from the department through to the ministry and the government itself.

As has been suggested by some, an internal New South Wales department review is not sufficient, it is not nearly sufficient. A process review of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, as has been suggested by the Prime Minister, is not good enough. What we need is nothing short of a full judicial review. That is what we, as a state government, have been demanding ever since the Four Corners allegations were aired; it is what the federal Labor Party is demanding, it is what the Greens, both federally and in this state, have called for, it is what Senator Xenophon and his state colleagues have called for, and it is what Senator Bernardi and the Australian Conservatives have called for.

It is what was called for at that quite unique and unprecedented joint press conference. It is what South Australian Labor is calling for. The only ones not calling for this are the Liberal Party in Canberra. I commend the motion.

The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:58): I rise to be, I guess, the second speaker on behalf of the opposition in relation to this motion, and indicate that we obviously fully support the intent of the matter we are debating today, although the urgency motion is a strange mechanism because it is not a motion we vote on. I did suggest to the Hon. Tammy Franks that if we had more time perhaps a different mechanism may have been to suspend standing orders and have a motion where we actually voted. The motion may have indicated that we convey, by the Clerk or the President, the wishes and sentiments of this council to the federal government, the Prime Minister and minister Joyce. However, we could not change things in the short time frame available.

We are all aware of the importance of the River Murray to South Australia—it has been so ever since we have been settled—and also, of course, its importance to our regional and rural communities especially, and to Adelaide. I was interested in the Leader of the Government's comments that this particular issue crosses over all politics. I remind members of the Hon. Michelle Lensink's comments that, if the issue crosses over all politics, it seems a little strange that an offer, at least, was not made to the state opposition to be part of the press conference that was put together over the weekend. It is interesting, Mr President.

It is vitally important to South Australia that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is implemented in full and that everybody sticks to the rules. It is vitally important that that happens. However, it is interesting that, at the first opportunity, this state government decides to exclude us from that particular press conference, which shows, sadly, that at every opportunity they are prepared to play politics, rather than actually address the major issues.

I watched the Four Corners program at home and was alarmed, like everybody else who saw it, by the allegations made in the report, which were alarming. We do not know their veracity, but certainly, from what I saw on that program, I think it gives us all some significant cause for concern that people have been taking and diverting water that they have not been entitled to. The plan has been endorsed by all state governments, yet, as my colleague the Hon. Michelle Lensink points out, there are people upstream who would like to tear it up—they do not like it. But, at the end of the day, we have signed up to it.

I listened to the honourable Minister for Police talk about drought, and I think that one of the sad things we always have to bear in the back of our mind is that, no matter how robust our plan is and whatever punitive penalties we have in place, we will, unfortunately, have another big drought at some point in the future. Some of the things he spoke of will be because of drought. There is a plan, but I expect that, at some point in the future, the plan will be criticised because we have run out of water because we are, as Dorothea Mackellar once said a couple of hundred years ago, a land 'of droughts and flooding rains', and we will always be that. So, we have to bear in mind that we should have a plan that can manage, as best it can, the river with the flows resulting from the rainfall that is around.

I always think we have to be careful that we do not think we have a mechanism that will solve every problem. I think the Hon. John Dawkins was involved in agriculture before coming to this place, but looking around, I think I am the only farmer who was a full-time irrigator—obviously not from the Murray, but from the underground basin in the South-East—before coming to this place. I am well aware of how important that particular access to the resource is for both economic activity and the environment.

I spoke to somebody recently at an agribusiness lunch, as we left, a South Australian company. I will not name them because I suspect they are probably not prepared to go public with this yet. But they have a technology to actually measure, on a daily basis, all water consumption across the entire basin. I am hopeful that, once we get to 2019 and the plan is implemented in full, we look to the latest technology because if somebody is doing something wrong and it is monitored on a daily basis, we will know on a daily basis. However, with the remote metering we have now it is somewhat difficult to tell.

As I said, the plan has been endorsed by all, and I live in hope that we get to a point where the plan is fully implemented in 2019. I hope we use the latest technology to give us all comfort that every user and everybody who accesses the river, whether it is for environmental, irrigation or urban use, takes the share they are entitled to and nobody exploits the resource that is there. We absolutely do need a transparent inquiry. That is one of the things I have learned in the last 15½ years in this place. The state government that I sit opposite to has had a whole range of inquiries—some have been very thorough and have probed a whole range of issues, and some have not.

I think the community loses trust in the government if you do not have a transparent inquiry, so I urge the Prime Minister to make sure that we have a transparent inquiry that gives all people who access the Murray-Darling Basin comfort that all the issues are being looked at. I think we should also never forget—and I will certainly be sending a copy of what is said today to some of my federal colleagues—what the contribution of the river is. Obviously, there is a big component that tourism (I am the shadow minister for tourism) makes to the economy of South Australia and the region. It is significant that the Riverland and the Murraylands are important parts of our tourism assets and really do add diversity to our tourism offering.

It is interesting to see some stats on food and export out of that region. I think it is important to reinforce to everybody why it is so important. The current gross revenue estimate for the Murraylands and Riverland region is $2.1 billion of South Australia's $15 billion, so it is a significant contributor. If we look at some of the stats, we have 37 per cent of the state's vegetables grown in those areas; 58 per cent of the state's fruit production; 52 per cent of the state's total value of grapes, so a huge contribution; 18 per cent of the value of cereals for grain; 99.94 per cent of the total value of oranges; 58 per cent of the value of potatoes; 28 per cent of the total value of milk; 89 per cent of the total value of almonds; and 20 per cent of the state's livestock products and slaughtering.

If you look at that livestock one, people do not often think about animals being reliant on it, but the Murraylands and Riverland, I think, currently produce more than 50 per cent of South Australia's broiler chickens and host the only state-based broiler chicken hatchery. The region produces more than 50 per cent of the state's pork production, and there are many opportunities to grow in beef and lamb in intensive ways with feedlots in that area.

So, we on this side certainly do not underestimate the importance of a viable, healthy river for South Australia. It is vitally important. It is important that we do not tear up the plan, and it is important that we have endorsed it and that the plan is implemented in full and that all Australians respect that plan. With those few words, I commend the motion to the chamber.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Climate Change) (15:06): The Four Corners program that aired on 24 July has raised some very serious concerns and some very serious questions about the commitment of the New South Wales government and our commonwealth government to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. It has been over a week since the program aired, and every day new allegations and concerns are being raised which involve the New South Wales government, high-ranking officials from the New South Wales department with responsibilities for water and, perhaps even more concerning, the lack of any commitment from our national water minister or indeed Prime Minister to properly investigate the claims of corruption and theft as outlined on the Four Corners program.

To briefly recap, since the program aired the New South Wales government has announced a sham of an investigation with pathetically narrow parameters. I think my leader mentioned that the parameters include specific dates for which an investigation would occur: between 1 and 5 June 2015 (four days); 20 August 2015 in relation to one property called Miralwyn; and 13 February 2016 in relation to another property called Rumleigh. That is just insufficient. If you do not want to get an answer to an inquiry, I guess what you do is try to truncate the terms of reference for such an inquiry.

Additionally, Ms Perin Davey, Barnaby Joyce's—the Deputy Prime Minister's—latest appointment on the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, has been linked to the secret phone recordings which were aired on Four Corners where it was stated there was a plan B to walk away from the basin plan and where it was reflected that plan B was fun and that there was a plan C that was scary. If plan B, to walk away from the basin plan, was fun, I shudder to think what plan C would have been.

It has been put to her, I understand, on some authority that she was a participant in that telephone hook-up—Ms Perin Davey, the Deputy Prime Minister's latest appointment for the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and a former National Party staffer—and apparently she has said to the media who asked the question that she cannot confirm or deny.

Barnaby Joyce, the Deputy Prime Minister, stood up with the media, in Canberra I think but perhaps elsewhere, and declared this issue to be solely a state based matter. Then he heads off to a pub in Shepparton to proudly announce to all assembled that the National Party took control of the water portfolio, and to quote:

We've taken water and put it back into agriculture so we can look after you and make sure we don't have the greenies running the show…

Just today, the front page of the Daily Telegraph in New South Wales has this story:

A Nationals minister is pushing cabinet colleagues to change irrigation laws to retrospectively justify a decision by his department to give a major political donor and cotton farmer more rights over the precious Barwon-Darling River.

Every day there is a new allegation. There is much more to be discovered in relation to this story and that is why the New South Wales sham inquiry has very little work to do. They do not want this to come to light. The National Party minister those allegations are levelled towards is the very same minister who is overseeing an inquiry that has deliberately ensured that it will only look at those allegations of water theft occurring over a four-day period in 2015 and those two other dates, when in fact there are claims of systemic and long-term gaming of the water rules and compliance in New South Wales.

This inquiry will not be able to determine whether there is material evidence of water being taken without legal authority in the Barwon-Darling since the commonwealth Water Act of 2007 took effect, and, of course, that is exactly what New South Wales wants—the New South Wales government in this instance.

On the heels of this pathetic promise to investigate four days of water use only, and those other two dates that I mentioned, came a joint statement released by Deputy Prime Minister Mr Joyce and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. They want a national review to be run by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority to investigate if there have been any breaches of state laws governing water use, but I note from the Prime Minister's statement that he said they will be asking jurisdictions to cooperate. We already have plenty of evidence from the Four Corners show that at least one jurisdiction has not been cooperating at all. Why would we think they would cooperate again?

This is a very convenient solution, considering the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Joyce, has been appointing his mates to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, an authority the Prime Minister said should be 'expert and independent'. He recently, as I said, nominated the former National Party staffer and member of the National Irrigators Council as a member of the authority. It is this council that has been lobbying the Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce, not to deliver the full plan, notably the 450 gigalitres of water agreed to by all ministers and the Prime Minister.

We have Ms Perin Davey, Barnaby's personal appointee, on record in April this year saying that she thinks delivering the 450 gigalitres critical to South Australia is impossible—impossible, in her words. She was quoted as saying, 'I will be emphasising that the 450 gigalitres of upwater attached to the basin plan cannot be delivered without devastating impacts.' That is Barnaby Joyce's most recent appointee to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, an independent and expert authority, supposedly.

Devastating impacts to whom? To the cotton growers in northern New South Wales that she represents? That is probably who she was thinking of. What about the devastating impact of a dying river on our economy? What about the devastating impact on our biodiversity and our Coorong and our Ramsar-listed wetlands? What about the devastating impact on the 3.4 million people who either live in the Murray-Darling Basin area or rely on the river for their livelihoods and for drinking water?

Ms Davey also said that we need political stability along the river to stop the impacts of the removal of water. The Deputy Prime Minister is clearly of this view as well, but his way of getting stability is by stacking the Murray-Darling Basin Authority with his mates so that they can collude and conspire behind the scenes to get the outcomes that he really was after all along. Stacking the MDBA is dirty politics for the benefit of a very, very few at the expense of irrigators up and down the river and all the communities that depend on the River Murray. It is at the expense of the 2.1 million people who live along the Murray-Darling Basin system and an additional 1.3 million Australians who rely on its water. That is 3.4 million people disadvantaged so that a couple of industrial sized cotton growers can make even more profits.

Even my old friend in the other place, Mr Steven Marshall, the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Dunstan, has previously condemned politically motivated appointments. In 2011, he told FIVEaa that appointments to the former Murray-Darling Basin Commission should definitely, unequivocally have been independent of politics. We all say we agree with that. But I have to say that, while we can agree with that and we welcome the state Liberals' support today, I do need to respond to comments made by both Liberal speakers in regard to not being invited to the event on Monday.

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: You're going to rewrite history now, are you?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Well, it is not a revision of history. It may pass your understanding, that is potentially understandable. The people who were convened by the Premier on that day were South Australian senators. The Premier was making a political point to the Prime Minister that we have some clout in this business in the Senate, in which he requires—the Prime Minister, that is—some cooperation in the Senate to pass his legislation.

So, the Premier brought together South Australian senators. He did not bring together the Hon. Tammy Franks, the Hon. Mark Parnell, the Hon. Kelly Vincent, the Hon. Dennis Hood or the Hon. Mr Darley. He did not bring them together because they are not senators. He invited the senators of South Australia.

As I said in response to a question yesterday from the member for Bright in estimates, it was contemplated all along that we would invite the Liberal senators, but I decided that: (a) clearly, as members of government and ministers in the government, they would find it very uncomfortable to come along and criticise their own government and, by extension, themselves, I suppose; and (b) I decided that inviting them to set them up like that and publicly make it known that I invited them and that they were not there would be more embarrassing to them, so I did not do it.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: I thought that was the best course of action. I apologise profusely. Today is a day for you to stand up; today is a day for you to stand up and join the government and join all of us together to send a very strong message that we as a state parliament require the federal government to instigate an independent judicial inquiry.

This is the other point I wanted to make about the contribution from Liberal members. I do not think that at any stage–and I will go back and check the Hansard to make sure—they actually used that phrase. I do not think they called for an independent judicial inquiry; I think they called for an independent inquiry. That is the point of concern, and I express to them, to clarify this—

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink interjecting:

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: No, it is only a judicial inquiry that will get to the bottom of these allegations. It is only a judicial inquiry that will have the power to compel witnesses—

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: Would you like a copy of David Speirs' media release from Monday?

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Ms Lensink will allow the minister to finish his contribution.

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER: Only an independent judicial inquiry has the power to compel witnesses, to call for evidence and documents and to give some form of protection to witnesses who want to come forward as whistleblowers, not some other inquiry, independent or otherwise. New South Wales said that its inquiry is independent, but clearly it is not and it is insufficient. I say to our Liberal colleagues here, who are joining us in support of this motion: please make sure you are calling for an independent judicial inquiry because that is the only thing that will get to the bottom of these allegations.

There are other allegations that I will quickly gallop through that need to be brought to light. There was, in addition to the ones we are dealing with now, allegations that in 2016 a decision was made to grant extra irrigation rights to a cotton farmer in the New South Wales area. The Daily Telegraph has obtained another document, I am advised, showing that former water minister, Ms Katrina Hodgkinson, changed the water sharing plan to benefit irrigators after they lobbied her to do so. This is industrial-scale water theft, and if these allegations are borne out it amounts to a conspiracy at the very highest levels of the New South Wales government.

This could turn out to be one of the biggest public policy scandals that any of us have seen in our time in this place. These are serious allegations of fraud, theft, collusion and conspiracy. This is $13 billion worth of taxpayers' money, and it is vital to everybody who depends on the Murray-Darling Basin. At the very least, it is our drinking water supply that we rely on in this state. The Murray-Darling Basin could not be of more significance to the nation. We have heard speakers confirm that, and it goes without saying.

South Australians can no longer trust Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce with handling the water portfolio. These allegations raise very serious concerns and very serious questions about the integrity of the National Party at a national level. The extent of this deception goes much further than we realised, on the basis of allegations being raised on the front page of the Daily Telegraph today, reaching all the way to the top of the New South Wales government and the National Party at a national level.

Deputy Prime Minister Mr Joyce says one thing about the Murray-Darling Basin Plan when he is speaking to the national media—platitudes, it turns out, because he says completely the opposite when he is in pubs and thinks he is off the record, not being recorded and speaking to people he thinks are supportive of his position. He is actively undermining the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, and actively undermining his own Prime Minister's position on a policy that impacts millions of Australians. He is incapable of delivering the basin plan, and Prime Minister Turnbull must replace him in that portfolio, for the good of all Australians who care about the sustainable future of our vital rivers.

We need national compliance and enforcement arrangements to provide the confidence that stated-based water resource planning arrangements are being implemented with integrity, and that commonwealth environmental water in the basin will not be diverted away from the river for private gain. The Prime Minister needs to stop pandering to Mr Joyce and his National Party cronies and commission a full judicial inquiry to look into allegations of more than a billion litres of water stolen from the Murray-Darling river system and allegations of Public Service conspiracy that go all the way to the highest level of the Department of Primary Industries in New South Wales.

Finally, I want to leave you with some words from two long-term farmers who rely on the river, one from New South Wales and one from South Australia. Let these words resonate across this chamber. On Monday, Mr Robert McBride spoke at an unprecedented gathering of senators from across the political divide calling for an independent judicial inquiry. He got up at this press conference and said:

Our family have proudly been farming for 162 years in our nation. We're not fly-by-nighters, we're pretty proud of our history and I think we are looking for the next generation and we're looking at sustainability…we're warning you that your Murray-Darling Basin system is about to collapse, it is a catastrophe.

He went on to say:

We're pretty humble people from the western division of New South Wales; we're very proud of the Murray-Darling Basin. We watched your river die for eight-and-a-half months last year and that's a catastrophe, and it is your catastrophe, it's my catastrophe.

The river system will collapse over time if it's not managed effectively. In this week we're fortunate enough to have the allegations from Four Corners, and isn't it great for a free press. It's the tip of the iceberg; we've dealt with it for many years so it's not new to us.

What is critically important is the bipartisan support we're receiving, it's your river and it's not going to last for much longer unless it's protected accordingly. So please ladies and gentlemen, do take this very seriously.

That is the New South Wales heartland talking, pleading for Mr Joyce and Mr Turnbull to hear their voices, too, about their farm and their business, which will not be around if we do not manage the river system sustainably into the future. Then we heard from Sam Dodd, a dairy farmer and irrigator in the Lower Lakes. He said:

I have a long family history on the Lower Lakes and Coorong, and our primary position in life as farmers is environmental outcomes, seeking environmental outcomes for our backyards because if we don't have water in the lake not only don't we have somewhere to live, we certainly won't be irrigators.

…Four Corners yet again have scratched the surface on corruption or misappropriation of water in the basin. So yes I certainly support the Minister and Premier and others, support for a judicial inquiry…

They are the words of two very passionate farmers who simply want a fair deal on water for everyone for a sustainable river for the future. I echo those words and the joint statement made on Monday. I commend the motion and the instigator of the motion for bringing it forward.

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:22): I rise to support the motion and I take this opportunity to commend the mover of the motion and for bringing it to the chamber's attention. My contribution will be brief because our position has been outlined in some detail by Senator Cory Bernardi at the press conference on Monday morning of this week, I believe, which a number of speakers have mentioned.

In short, the Australian Conservatives support this motion and particularly support the call for a judicial inquiry. We must ensure that South Australia is receiving a fair deal and that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is being upheld with integrity and transparency. We therefore call for an independent judicial inquiry to investigate the allegations of water theft in New South Wales from the basin as a matter of urgency and national significance. We call on the Prime Minister to commission an independent judicial inquiry or appoint a judge of national standing to report within 30 days. A healthy Murray-Darling Basin system is important for the nation's prosperity, which is why these allegations must be investigated without delay.

I will make one final comment in my very brief contribution in support of this motion: I think it is important that all political parties represented in this place act in the best interests of South Australia in pursuing this endeavour, rather than letting differences across the chamber influence the outcome. It is a significant thing for our state and it really is the lifeblood of South Australia, and I call on all members of this place and the other place to act as one in supporting this motion and, I believe, a similar motion in the other place, such that the federal authorities will take note that South Australia is determined to achieve an outcome on this issue.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (15:24): I rise to commend the Hon. Tammy Franks for bringing this motion to the chamber. I saw the Four Corners program on Monday 24 July this year, which outlined the alarming allegations that were made, and I fully support the calling for a judicial inquiry into this matter. I support the motion.

The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (15:25): I will also be very brief in indicating the Dignity Party's support for this motion, not only because the majority of what needs to be said has been said by the speakers, but also because I do not think anyone needs to have it explained to them why the Murray is important, not only to the state of South Australia but indeed to the whole country of Australia. Whether you learned about the environment at school, or you are in an agricultural business, or you live in an area that is particularly dependent on the river, or you just need water to brush your teeth and have a shower, all of us depend on the River Murray, and not just, of course, in South Australia.

It is really important that we work together because one thing that is perhaps different for some people in the community is that the community depends on people like us in this chamber here today to do whatever we can to defend the River Murray. As other speakers have said, let's put political differences aside and work together on this very important issue. I would also like to thank those who worked on the Four Corners story because we often rely on the media to bring matters of public interest and importance to the attention of the community so that we can get actions like this that we are seeing today. With those few brief words, I commend the motion.

The Hon. M.C. PARNELL (15:26): I, too, will briefly rise to support the motion. I congratulate my colleague the Hon. Tammy Franks for putting it on the agenda, and I note that my federal colleague Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has also put this on the Senate agenda. Just an hour and a half ago, the Premier made a statement in another place effectively putting on the agenda of the House of Assembly tomorrow a very similar motion to the one that we are debating now.

I note, of course, the leadership of the Legislative Council in these matters. No-one could accuse us of not taking the very first opportunity to debate this matter of national importance. In fact, we have even suspended question time to do so, which is not something that we would do lightly, but I also note that it is not a tool that has been abused too often. My colleague mentioned before that the Hon. Rob Brokenshire was the last person to use this tool back in 2008, to again debate a matter of national interest, being the fate of the River Murray.

The Hon. Kelly Vincent in her remarks commented on the good work that was done by the Four Corners team. I would add three things to that: first of all, the importance of an independent national broadcaster comes to the fore when we see programs like that particular show. I am also minded to note that two of the organisations that featured in that program are organisations that I have had the privilege to work for: the Environmental Defenders Office New South Wales featured, as did the Australian Conservation Foundation. Collectively, I have spent 14 years of my life working for both of those organisations and, whilst it is not the place now to weigh in to another debate on the tax deductibility of donations to organisations such as that, it just shows that, through advocacy work, they are doing this country a great service.

The particular aspect that I am looking forward to an independent judicial inquiry getting into are the allegations of maladministration, misuse of authority, conspiracy and corruption. Anyone who saw the program would be aware that there are serious question marks over the behaviour of senior officials through the, I presume, secretly tape-recorded telephone conversation. We have government officials offering to hand sensitive information over to irrigator lobbyists and, as has been mentioned before, a number of people who participated in that conference call delighting in the prospect of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan collapsing altogether and New South Wales withdrawing from it, so I would like to see that emphasised in the inquiry.

Something we are not allowed to talk about in South Australia, but they are in New South Wales, is ICAC. I note, from media in the last couple of days, that at least two people have been referred to the ICAC in New South Wales, namely, a former water minister and the New South Wales water bureaucrat who featured in the program.

I mention that not because that is any substitute for an independent judicial inquiry but just to make the point that some people in New South Wales are taking these allegations seriously and looking at what tools are available within their jurisdiction to deal with them. I agree with the comments that others have made that the New South Wales internal inquiry just does not cut it. It is limited by its terms of reference and particularly frustrating is that it is limited in terms of the dates on which potential incidents can be investigated.

If we got nothing else from the Four Corners report, it is the fact that, where there is smoke there is very likely to be fire. The fact that they might have uncovered one or two cases of meter tampering suggests to me that that may just be the tip of the iceberg. A fully independent judicial inquiry with powers to compel witnesses and which gives, as the minister said, protection to whistleblowers is absolutely critical if we want to get to the bottom of it.

I am hoping that by the end of tomorrow all 69 members of state parliament would have had a chance to debate this matter of national interest. The message going to the Prime Minister will be loud and clear that South Australians are determined to protect the health of the River Murray for the environment and for all river users.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (15:30): Mr President, I thank everyone who has made a contribution today and look forward to action from this, and seek leave to withdraw the motion.

Leave granted; motion withdrawn.

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