Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm delighted to be standing here today in this chamber with my South Australian colleagues to speak against the motion moved by the member for Nicholls. The Murray-Darling Basin is of critical importance to the state of South Australia, so it's little wonder why the member for Boothby, the member for Makin and the member for Adelaide are here. I can even see the member for Barker in the Chamber too. If he does speak on this motion, it's indeed my hope that he attempts to resist the coalition partners and stand up for his home state, because that's what we are here to do today. We're here to stand up for the Murray-Darling Basin. We're here to stand up for cooperative federalism. There will be no ifs, ands or buts about this. We're here to stand up for South Australia.

It seldom surprises me that the contemporary National Party finds supporting South Australia to be an alien concept. The National Party has not had an elected official in federal or state parliament in South Australia since 2010, and even then the member in question served out the end of her parliamentary career as a minister in a Labor state government—a Minister for the River Murray and Minister for Water Security no less. Nowadays it's akin to putting the proverbial fox in the henhouse—it is, of course, in the state of New South Wales, formerly of the one and only 'Pork Barilaro'. Those days are now behind us. Like many, on Saturday I will be looking at the TV sets to see whether we will bear witness to the formation of a Minns state government in New South Wales—a state government that could join together with the state governments led by Peter Malinauskas and Daniel Andrews and get the plan back on track.

Getting the plan back on track is something sorely needed after years of inaction and sabotage, whether that be by the federal government at the time, a state government or a bad actor along the river system. Those opposite, particularly the Nationals, criticise a plan using the slogan that it put the environment above people. They do so by referencing the environment as some abstract concept malevolently trying to push irrigators along the river out of business. I find this such an astounding hyperbolic way, not to mention an inaccurate way, to describe what the plan are trying to protect and safeguard. Are we not also part of our environments? It is neither a shock nor a surprise to hear those opposite believe the environment is something worth existing in any meaningful way along the basin. Their record on the environment and climate is pretty self-evident, but this time it really is an exercise in cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

The environment is 120 different species of waterbird, 50 native fish species, 16 internationally renowned protected wetlands. The environment is $11 billion of revenue through tourism to the regions around the basin each year. Those opposite really would throw the baby out with the bath water without a pause for thought of the quality of the water in that bath at the time. To that end, the environment means that the 2.3 million people who call their own little patch along the Murray-Darling Basin home can have access to clean drinking water. You would not think we would be fighting over whether all Australians deserve clean drinking water, but I guess with those opposite we have hit a new normal that I am still not quite desensitised to yet.

This is why the Albanese Labor government is here to ensure the primacy of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan over whatever the Liberal Party had to sell off to keep the wheels on their top-secret coalition agreement with the Nationals over the course of the past nine years whilst they were in government. I hope the days of hostage diplomacy with the plan are now over. Threatening to walk away from the plan entirely if their demands are not met is a very short-term way of thinking. The member for Watson put forward a very succinct form of reasoning as to why cooperation was key with the basin at the time when he was the water minister in the Gillard government. He noted that for decades policymakers had allowed the Murray-Darling Basin to be governed as though rivers wouldn't respect state boundaries. This rings a great deal of truth, as, no matter what side of the basin you're on, inaction to save it will catch up to us all eventually. It is something we should avoid at all costs.

See this speech in context