House debates

Monday, 15 June 2020

Private Members' Business

Water

12:41 pm

Photo of Tony ZappiaTony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The motion moved by the member for Mayo raises a matter that has been the subject of much public discussion over recent years. It is a topic about which there is very little accurate information available, partly because water ownership is not well documented and also because individual states maintain their own records, there are over 150 different types of water ownerships available and there is constant change in ownership. It is very much a muddled system, so much so that local Makin resident Bob O'Brien, who I have come to know well, was motivated to write a book on water ownership in Australia. His book, titled Water Barons: Money, politics and control of water in Australiais still in draft form. I've seen a copy of that draft. It provides the clearest explanation I've come across of water ownership in Australia. Information in the book has been thoroughly researched. Bob was a water investor for several years; so he understands the subject matter very well. According to the latest information we have, 10 per cent of Murray-Darling Basin water—that is, around 1.85 gigalitres—is foreign owned. How much impact that has on water prices is unclear; nor do we know how much water is held by Australian entities, individuals and farmers who also profit from buying and selling water allocations. I note that the Productivity Commission is doing some work on this and was meant to have provided the government with a report or interim report only recently. From the limited information that we have available, both the US and China, at 1.9 per cent each, were the two largest foreign water holders. The UK came next, at 1.1 per cent. I also note with interest that total Chinese investment in Australia dropped markedly from $8.2 billion in 2018 to $3.4 billion in 2019, with 43 per cent fewer deals struck. That was the lowest level since 2008.

The government's recent announcement that sensitive national security business will also be subject to FIRB approval, regardless of value, does not make clear whether water ownership will be affected. Why sensitive national security was never a consideration is beyond me. Notwithstanding, good public policy should always be evidence based.

For Murray-Darling Basin growers, access to water at affordable prices is key to their viability. The mismanagement and overallocation of water by state authorities, the continued bickering between the states, the diversion of surface water before it enters the river system and the commitment by all jurisdictions to a sustainable plan without then being undermined by parties to that commitment, are also issues that must be addressed for basin farmers to operate with a reasonable level of certainty—and they need certainty in order to plan for their own future.

I have spoken to basin farmers who have paid around $10,000 a hectare for the water they need to produce their crops at times when it is critically needed. At those prices, they simply cannot operate, and it makes their operations unviable. I realise that this is a matter of incredible importance for them. However, we need to get more information and better information if we are ever going to be able to assist them with managing the water system in this country.

Water trading was introduced to enable growers to access water from other entitlement holders, sometimes from other parts of the basin, during times of water shortages and not for overseas speculators to profit off the back of struggling farmers. I note the comment of the previous speaker, the member for Nicholls, a moment ago in respect of the Lower Lakes of South Australia. There was a recent CSIRO report in respect of those lakes that said the lakes were always fresh water lakes, going back as far as our records show. So to constantly try and use the Lower Lakes in South Australia as an excuse for the problems of the Murray-Darling Basin is totally misguided. I would like to think that we might once and for all look to the Basin Plan, after years of work done by members of this parliament, and also external authorities, as it shows the only way that we can manage the water properly for the growers and ensure that they have security, and security at affordable prices, is to have a Murray-Darling Basin Plan that is consistent with the rules that it was framed under. With regard to overseas water ownership, it is only one of the many matters that needs to be addressed.

Comments

No comments