HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2020-10-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Motions

Murray-Darling Basin Plan

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:10): I move:

That this council—

1. Notes with concern the first review of the Water for the Environment Special Account independent panel finding that the agreed 450 gigalitres of water for South Australia under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan will not be fully expended by 30 June 2024, as required;

2. Expresses dismay that so far South Australia has received less than 1 per cent of that required 450 gigalitres; and

3. Condemns the December 2018 changes to the socio-economic criteria for water efficiency measures.

I struggle to find the words to adequately convey the utter dismay I and many other South Australians have felt following the release of the first review of the Water for the Environment Special Account report from the independent panel. After so many years of hearing from governments and from ministers, who have assured us constantly that the new efficiency measures, the new criteria for projects, not using water buybacks, would somehow definitely deliver vital water for South Australia, we now know what we suspected, that none of this was true. None of this was actually the case.

The Greens have been saying it for a while, but many in the community—stakeholders, experts, farmers, environmentalists; a really diverse list—know that the government is not doing enough or doing the right things to deliver that vital water for our state. This first review not only makes it plain that we will not see the required 450 gigalitres of water delivered for our state, it also shows us how heartbreakingly little we have received so far. Of that 450 gigalitres, we have received 1.9 gigalitres, less than 1 per cent of what we are owed by that deadline.

I imagine some will want to point out that the full 450 gigalitres is not set to be delivered until 30 June 2024. However, this review indicates that the 450 gigalitres will not be recovered by 30 June 2024. Indeed, the panel provides several reasons for this finding:

Only 1.9 GL, or less than 1% of the required volume, has been recovered to date (as at February 2020). To recover almost the entire 450 GL in the less than 4.5 years remaining, the rate of recovery would need to accelerate to more than 100 GL per year, starting immediately. The panel does not consider that this is realistic at this stage.

So 100 gigalitres per year is required, yet in all of this time we have only reached 1.9 gigalitres. The report continues:

Information provided by the department suggests that up to 90 GL might be recovered by 2024 through efficiency projects being discussed with potential partners or participants (as at February 2020). However, the recovery of this volume is uncertain, as the projects are still in the pre-application phase and may not progress to formal application, approval and implementation.

Analysis commissioned for this review indicates that the potential volume that feasibly can be recovered by 2024 is up to 60 GL, due to the combined impact of key limiting factors—including current time constraints; current social views, government policies and political positions; and the current program's attractiveness to potential participants.

As it is stated by that independent panel in their letter to the minister, this review reflects a milestone assessment at this point in time. What a bleak milestone this is for South Australia. How did we get here? There are many factors, but there is a significant one in South Australia. Let's talk about efficiency measures. Efficiency measures are an agreed component of the basin plan to recover 450 gigalitres of water. This water aims to deliver enhanced environmental outcomes in the Coorong and Lower Lakes, as well as flood plains adjacent to rivers in the southern Murray-Darling Basin.

In 2018, the ministerial council agreed to adopt a set of socio-economic criteria, which are to be applied to all efficiency measures projects prior to any approval. Since the first appropriation of funds to that special account in 2014-15, the department has implemented and expended moneys on only three efficiency measures programs: the South Australian pilot of the Commonwealth On-Farm Further Irrigation Efficiency Program (COFFIE), which was funded from September 2016 to October 2018; the Murray-Darling Basin Water Infrastructure Program, which was funded from July 2018 to December 2018; and the Water Efficiency Program, which was funded from July 2019.

The COFFIE program recovered 1.9 gigalitres through 66 projects funded under this program, and that represents 0.4 per cent—less than half a per cent of the required 450 gigalitres. The Murray-Darling Basin Water Infrastructure Program received zero gigalitres as it was paused five months after its launch, when the ministerial council decided that the additional socio-economic criteria should be incorporated into the program. These additional criteria were agreed to in December 2018.

The program was redesigned and relaunched as the Water Efficiency Program in July 2019, and remains open. As at February 2020, this program has recovered around 0.015 gigalitres through two small on-farm projects. Essentially, no material progress has been made. The panel has indicated that, for the 450 gigalitres of water to be delivered by that 30 June 2024 date, we would have to, starting immediately, recover more than 100 gigalitres per year over the next four years. The panel does not consider this realistic at this stage, and certainly not under the current circumstances, and it is no surprise why.

All in all, this review tells us that only up to 60 gigalitres of water are potentially recoverable. Realistically, given the combined effects of the key limiting factors, those factors being: the technical potential for further water recovery in the basin through the Water Efficiency Program; the time constraints imposed by the special accounts legislated end date; the current social views, government policies and political positions on further water recovery in the basin; and the program's current attractiveness as a business proposition to potential participants.

To some extent these factors are related, but what make this even worse, however, is that the technical potential for water recovery through the Water Efficiency Program is between 600 and 650 gigalitres—significantly above the required 450 gigalitres. However, with the key limiting factors this changes to: 185 to 195 gigalitres when the impact of time constraints is factored in, which is less than half the required 450 gigalitres; further decreases to around 110 to 120 gigalitres, when the impact of current social views, government policies and political positions are factored in; and increases even further to less than a grand total of that 60 gigalitres, or perhaps less, when the impact of the program's current attractiveness to potential participants is also factored in.

The sums are dire. It is farcical. It would possibly be funny, if it was not so utterly devastating, when you look back on the minister's comments made in 2019 when he was quite chuffed with himself about the deal he struck with the other states on the socio-economic criteria. I quote:

In December, a historic agreement was struck between the Murray-Darling Basin states and the Commonwealth. In a significant moment for our state, Victoria and New South Wales finally agreed to participate in the full range of water-saving projects that could deliver the 450 gigalitres. We did this by bringing all the states to the table and led to the development of a package that will lead to actual water being delivered back to the river—

Not much actual water so far—

while ensuring regional communities are not ripped apart—just as the original plan from 2012 demands.

I tell you what rips regional communities apart, and that is not even having an environment that is healthy to sustain that community regardless of the socio-economic factors. Further to this, the observations from the panel about government policies and political positions are even more damning.

Indeed, in particular, this minister of this Marshall government capitulated to other states on the socio-economic criteria that are contributing to the failure to achieve a return of 450 gigalitres of water to the system. We have a minister who is standing firm behind these efficiency measures and who continues to stand against using buybacks, despite the fact that we have been told repeatedly by the federal government's own research agency, ABARES, the previous Murray-Darling Basin royal commission, experts and the community that water buybacks are a more effective and less costly option for recovering that required 450 gigalitres of water.

We cannot, in this council, on behalf of our state, stand by while we get barely a trickle of water coming down the river. The minister has sold our state down the river for just 1.9 gigalitres so far. It is up to this council to stand against that and call this minister to account.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.J. Stephens.

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