Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is very hard when you are dealing with water to get agreement. Since man has been on this planet it is what seems to start wars. The fact that we have managed to get a report that is supported by both the government and other parties is quite something, and I commend all those who have worked so hard in that process. Water is the source of wealth. It is also the source of all the problems that can occur if the mix is wrong and the mathematics incorrect. Often when we do a report on water we are actually doing a report on drought and, as everyone knows, drought is a complete lack of water. For instance, in our area now I can assure you that there is no water above us, no water on us and no water below us. There is just no water. It has not rained, and that can inspire a sense of hopelessness in people who live without water.

When you live without water things can be very dire—in fact, it will send you broke. This charges the debate with emotion, and people feel that the only way you can get through the emotion of the debate is to find an answer to no rain. There is no answer to no rain. The only answer to no rain is rain. It would be marvellous if someone in this chamber could work out how to do that. We would certainly have something newsworthy then.

I want to concentrate on a positive outcome of this report, one that deals with the fact that we in this nation must start to look to the way in which we are going to put people where the water is rather than always trying to recalibrate the issue of moving water to where the people are or somehow dividing up the water cake when there is no more water cake to divide up. One of the recommendations is that the government must look to tax incentives or managed investment schemes or other government incentives to start giving people a very strong reason to live in different corners of this nation. What Senator Siewert said is correct: you cannot go back to the Murray-Darling Basin because there is nothing more there to divide up. It is a fully allocated system and, some would strongly suggest, overallocated.

So that either puts a cap on our growth or suggests that we have to start looking at other areas and start giving people a back-pocket reason to go to other areas. We have to start giving that leadership reason to go to other areas of our nation. There is a great opportunity politically for whoever wants to take up the cudgels to come up with a program that further develops some of the water we have in our north and give people an alternative to being in the Murray-Darling Basin.

There are also great alternatives before the government if they wish to offer incentives to people to use less water-intensive crops and in so doing, if there is a real financial incentive for them to do it, say to them that the quid pro quo of that deal is that they must put water back into the river. They must give back to the river the water that they save and, for that benefit, they could get a financial advantage—for instance, higher depreciation rates or tax deductibility. Maybe they could even get grants for moving to a less water-intensive crop.

With this report we can also look at positive aspects and the way forward. It is all very well to comment on the problems. We can do that every day. But commenting on the problems just becomes an echo. The really smart thing is to come up with a path forward that causes the least hurt. There are comments, obviously, about the Lower Balonne and Condamine—the area from which I come. There are two sides to every coin, of course. There is a sense of the benefits that water, when it is used efficiently, can produce.

In an area such as St George we do not have some of the social problems that they have in other towns. When water is about, there is a sense of prosperity. There is a sense of people moving through the social stratification that can sometimes inhibit the growth of areas. We have Indigenous people who have actually become very wealthy members of our community. That is a positive outcome. There is a sense of egalitarianism, fair play and hope. There is a sense that water can deliver prosperity and a style and quality of life that fixes so many of the problems that are sometimes associated with remote regional towns.

In a place like St George we have a diversity of industry—and I put that on the back of water. We have a number of doctors. I think that, in a town of 3,000, we have about seven doctors. We have got around a lot of the ailments that have afflicted other areas. I firmly put that down to the utilisation of the water resources. I caution very strongly against the idea of putting water use up as a complete demon, because the use of water is not demonic. In fact, the use of water is sometimes a catalyst: it starts to actually deliver hope to areas. It was the fact that water was around that motivated me to move to St George and set up a business from scratch. It sustained me, my wife, my family and a number of employees—four employees at times. What I implore senators is that, in the reading of this report, we do not just see usage of water as something bad. Usage of water is something that, in so many cases throughout the world, is the inception of wealth.

The good thing about this report is that it asks people to look at the path forward—where you can go to deal with some of the problems that have arisen or may arise. That is what a good report does. It does not just wallow in grief. It does not partake in some hoary chestnut of a debate that gets kicked around. It gives a path forward.

I think those on both sides of this chamber would want to acknowledge that, if we are to do something worthwhile, it should be that we do not deliver fear to those people who are utilising water and whose lives have for once gone ahead by reason of the utilisation of this resource. We should deliver hope with regard to how we can better utilise it and further develop it in other areas.

The next stage for this nation is what we do in the north—how we get a better process and get further development in those areas where the demands on water have probably not been exceeded and where there is scope. From the Ord right around to the Burdekin, there is hope. Let us deliver hope to some of those gulf communities—especially in my state; places like Burketown—right around to Senator Nigel Scullion’s state and right up to Nhulunbuy. Let us deliver to them the hope that the people of the Murray-Darling Basin have in a lot of areas. It is not fair that we can just sit down here and say: ‘We’ve prospered. We’ve got ahead, but no-one else can do that. No-one else is allowed to partake of the wealth of our nation, only us.’ If we are a just and fair nation, we should look to those people in these areas who do not have the benefits that have been delivered to other areas and start thinking about them.

I believe that this government has a great chance to lay down a path for the Australian people at the next election, showing how they are going to deliver a true vision that the Australian people can remember this government by—how they can deliver that fairness, prosperity, justice, sense of hope, increase in the social structure and the ability for people to climb through social structures that is evident where water is properly and fairly used. I think that would be one of the greatest outcomes of this report. I commend the report to the Senate.