House debates

Wednesday, 20 October 2010

Matters of Public Importance

Murray-Darling Basin

4:24 pm

Photo of Patrick SeckerPatrick Secker (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I went to the meetings. Of course, like anyone, you get attacked: ‘What are you doing about it?’ But I will try to stay sane and rational about the whole basin plan. I know it is a tough decision. I know these are tough reforms, but we cannot stop. But we do have to take into account the social and economic results of any possible changes.

I have to say I was very disappointed to learn in Senate estimates yesterday that apparently consideration was not given to those issues until the day that the report was released. I think that is appalling, because section 20 of the act clearly says they have to take account of the socioeconomic problems that may result from this. So I am really concerned that we have got this far and we do not have all the information. I am not going to blame Rob Freeman or Mike Taylor. I think they are very good public servants and I know they are doing their best under pretty tough conditions, and I know they are going out there and talking to people. There is a lot of anger and they are dealing with it as best they can. But we need to have all that information so we can make rational decisions about whether we need 1,500, 3,000 or 4,000 gigs returned to the river and whether we can spend a lot more on infrastructure, which was the original plan of the Howard government—the $10 billion plan. That was on the basis that there would be the same amount of food produced because you could produce it with less water. That was the basis: that the gigalitres you lose in buybacks is returned to the growers. That was a very sensible plan. I still believe it is the best plan and I hope the government is still committed to it. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments