Kay Hull (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is no secret in this House that I have major concerns about the way in which the water buyback is taking place and the impact on the communities that I represent across the Riverina as well as communities across Australia. In putting this motion forward I want to present to the House the issues that I believe are confronting the people I represent. I could turn to no better demonstration than that which came from a group of young people who are agriculturalists and who met with Senator Penny Wong, the Minister for Climate Change and Water, last Thursday. Alistair Watt, Drew Braithwaite, Sam Gaston, Gavin Dal Broi and Kristian Bonetti came to Canberra from my electorate to meet with the minister to outline the issues. I am going to quote extensively and verbatim from something that adequately and succinctly presents the concerns that I have, and I am beholden to one of those young men, Sam Gaston, who put it together:

Drought conditions currently having a severe impact on the people that live and work in rural communities. The drought cycle will end. When the drought cycle does end, will water for food production be available on a level to sustain both farm based and town based business?

Main focus on the impact of Government funded water buyback has focused on the farming unit and the environment. What thought has been given to the families and businesses based in rural communities that will be impacted by this policy?

…            …            …

Once the drought ends, is there a future for people like me—

wrote Mr Gaston—

to stay in regional Australia working for agriculture based businesses? Are there opportunities for career development and the ability to make a positive impact on regional communities? The answer to these questions is yes, provided water availability for irrigation is maintained at sustainable levels.

What opportunities are available?

1. World class businesses still based in regional areas. Extensive infrastructure still in place. Currently underutilised due to drought conditions. All that is required is water to produce raw material. Skilled people required to operate these businesses when water is available.

2. Drought has forced major improvement in business efficiencies for those businesses that continue to survive in the current environment. These businesses will reap the rewards of these efficiencies when conditions improve.

3. Regional business will require access to competent and loyal workforce, however will this workforce be available?

Sam asks the question:

Why live in regional communities

1. Family base

2. Community base

3. Food Production—a matter of national security

4. Lifestyle

5. Agribusiness employment opportunities

He looks at:

Impact of permanent removal of water on businesses and communities based in irrigation areas

Loss of food production capacity to feed Australia and surrounding countries reliant on Australian food production, e.g. Pacific nations

Loss of skill staff from regional areas

Inability to attract skill staff to regional areas

Reduced investment from business due to supply risk

Massive cost of writing off redundant infrastructure

Negative impact on the family unit

Significant impact on regional communities both financially and socially.

In summary, Sam says:

Will my children have the opportunity to live and work in regional Australia if they so desire? Will my children grow up to enjoy a stable and healthy environment? I believe through a structured and equitable approach to water management the answer to both question can be Yes …

Sam believes:

Water is a strategic asset. When it rains and water becomes available for agricultural use, we have an obligation to ensure that we have in place the infrastructure, human resources and the regional communities to resume food production for Australia and the surrounding nations.

These young men who travelled to Canberra to wait all day to meet with the minister are the future of our nation, the future of agriculture, and they deserve a say. I could not have put forward the issues of the need for community impact statements—as outlined in my motion—any better than Sam did. The problem that I see adding to this is that, whilst the CSIRO work on catchments has been completed, we are two years away from a plan and work has still not been done to determine a sustainable yield for each catchment. How is the government going to manage the water to get the best outcome? (Time expired)

See this speech in context