This government is the government that has delivered a Basin Plan, a plan that has delivered better environmental outcomes for the Murray-Darling, a plan that is balanced to ensure that communities are protected and their jobs and industries looked after as well as returning water to the environment.
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (14:13):
My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources. Minister, my question goes to the scathing reports and findings of two reports, the South Australian royal commission into the Murray-Darling Basin and the Productivity Commission report released only some weeks ago. The South Australian royal commission found details relating to water theft, maladministration and the unlawfulness of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan itself. Will this government listen to these recommendations and act, or will you follow your South Australian colleagues and simply sit on your hands and ignore findings that you don’t like?
Senator CANAVAN (Queensland—Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) (14:13):
This government is the government that has delivered a Basin Plan, a plan that has delivered better environmental outcomes for the Murray-Darling, a plan that is balanced to ensure that communities are protected and their jobs and industries looked after as well as returning water to the environment.
An opposition senator interjecting—
Senator O’Sullivan interjecting—
Senator CANAVAN:
In fact, I’ll take the interjection from the other side, as Senator O’Sullivan has mentioned. The plan that we have delivered on is the plan that was agreed to by the former Labor government—but it has been delivered under this government.
The South Australian government did commission a royal commission on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. They have produced a detailed report which the government is reviewing. We have committed to ensure that the best available science is used in developing and implementing the Basin Plan. We are committed to making sure we work with state and territory governments to deliver better outcomes for all Australians who live in the Murray-Darling or rely on the Murray-Darling.
That’s why last year the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, Minister Littleproud, worked with his state and territory colleagues and got them to sign off on 14 December on a plan to implement the Basin Plan. That plan includes assurances that additional water recovered for the environment won’t hurt the social or economic basis of towns and communities, because we care about the environment, Senator Hanson-Young—through you, Mr President—but we also care about people as well. We care about people, we care about their communities and we want to make sure they all have a sustainable future here in this country producing the food they do for all of us.
The PRESIDENT:
Senator Hanson-Young, a supplementary question?
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (14:15):
The South Australian royal commissioner found that the management of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan was unlawful. What legal advice does the government have that your actions and management—or mismanagement—is not breaching the Water Act and when will you release that advice?
Senator CANAVAN (Queensland—Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) (14:16):
The government is very confident that the Basin Plan was developed consistent with the requirements of the Water Act. The Water Act itself is a legitimate act that was passed by this parliament. This question about legal advice has been raised before. In fact, I think it was raised during the previous government’s time as well. The government does not release legal advice in regard to legislation, although I would refer you to the fact that, I think, former Minister Burke some time ago released a summary of such legal advice that you can review. On the claims you’ve made about maladministration—and my advice is from the royal commission—most of those came on the commissioner’s basis that the Water Act itself was invalid in the first place. We obviously disagree with that point of view based on our legal advice on the Water Act and therefore we don’t accept those conclusions either.
The PRESIDENT:
Senator Hanson-Young, a final supplementary question?
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (14:16):
We’ve had a million dead fish in the lower Darling over summer, we’ve had an environmental disaster throughout our river system and the government has done nothing. All you’re suggesting is that we pray for rain. When will you act and give the river back the water it needs?
Senator CANAVAN (Queensland—Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) (14:17):
Given that Senator Hanson-Young has raised the issue of dead fish, I want to point out one fact. I pointed this out yesterday, but now I will to the whole chamber here in question time. That is that it is dams that help us regulate the system to protect fish. It is dams that help us keep water in the river. You can go, Senator Hanson-Young, up to New England and the Copeton Dam and see that, downstream of the Copeton Dam, there are no fish kills because we have a dam that is able to keep water in the river. Upstream of Copeton Dam there are fish kills because there are no dams. And guess what? The Greens are opposed to dams. They are opposed to them all. They don’t want any of them. We have a regulated system and it is being managed well. It is the fact that sometimes during dry times we have no water for farmers and no water for rivers. That is the system. Right now, the Greens would have you believe there are farmers out there ripping water out of the basin. Where I am from, where Senator O’Sullivan is from and in northern New South Wales, they are having no water use at all. The system is being managed in accordance with the environmental factors we have. It is a much better system now thanks to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.
