Ian Causley (Page, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to contribute to this discussion and follow in the footsteps of the honourable members for New England, Farrer and Corio. I must say that the member for Corio, in true form, was full of rhetoric and full of huff and puff, but I did not hear too much about the facts of the matter. It is fairly clear why he lost his preselection.

Drought is a serious subject and it is a serious subject for Australia for a particular reason: Australia is the driest inhabited continent on earth. Drought plagued this country long before Europeans came here, and it has certainly plagued this country since Europeans came here; drought has been the face of the country. Governments and the people of Australia have toiled and battled with drought for all of that time. Over the years, to be fair to governments of both persuasions, I think they have dealt with drought in a reasonable way. But that does not mean to say that we cannot do it better. Having been New South Wales Minister for Water Resources for five years, New South Wales Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, and minister for western lands in New South Wales, I think I have dealt with some of these issues on a fairly regular basis.

Let me say before we get into the alarmist talk around the place about what drought is about: there have been many severe droughts. This is a severe drought, but whether it is our most severe drought, I suppose, is a moot point. In the honourable member for Kennedy’s seat, or very close to it, the James Cook University takes core samples of the Great Barrier Reef and there is evidence there of droughts of up to 20 years in Australia. So drought is the continuing face of Australia.

When we see articles from the Financial Review or comments from Professor Peter Cullen saying that all of a sudden Australian farmers are unviable, that they should not be out in these areas farming there and that the government is propping up an industry which is unviable, I have to say to them that they are way off the mark. The last time I checked, Australian agriculture was still contributing 25 per cent or more of the export income of this country. That is a considerable contribution. There is no doubt in my mind that the drought relief that we give is very minimal. We are criticised when we go into trade negotiations that we still have subsidies in Australia. The only thing the Americans could point at me about when I was Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries in New South Wales was drought relief. I used to say to them that drought relief provides very minimal support for our farmers. If we do not support them through a drought and if we do not support the core herds and flocks of this country, there is very little use in getting rain. You have to recover from those droughts and if the rural economy is going to recover and the Australian economy is going to keep on growing, you need that production after the drought.

The member for Farrer is quite correct: that country out there is tremendously resilient. I have been out there three or four weeks after rain and it would amaze you the way the grass and the trefoil have grown, as she said, up to your waist within a month. It is very valuable feed. Not only is the growing trefoil valuable but the seed that falls on the ground sustains the sheep during drought. I applaud the member for New England—and I do not often do that. I would prefer to see him on this side of the House, but there is no doubt that he has raised a very serious issue.

I will make some comments about Professor Peter Cullen. It is not the first time that the Professor Peter Cullen has made a comment. Quite frankly, to have him as the Commissioner for Water in this government is very worrying. Professor Peter Cullen parades as a scientist and he gets up there as a scientist having credibility within the Australian community. That is fine if he keeps his comments based on science. But I have to say that the two comments I remember clearly were, firstly, about the Murray-Darling River, which I think came out of the so-called Wentworth meeting in Sydney, when they said that the Murray-Darling was dying. In fact, the quality of the Murray River downstream is now better than it was 10 or 15 years ago because of the intervention schemes and the policies of all governments, state and federal, to stop the contamination and salinity of the Murray system. So, wrong, Professor Peter Cullen.

See this speech in context