Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Hansard source

I am very aware of the Australia state of the environment 2006 report, which I released at 10 o’clock today. It is a report prepared by Professor Bob Beeton from the University of Queensland and a committee of eminent scientists as well as other specialists. It tells some very good news about progress with environmental repair in Australia. Because it really is an independent report, it is a ‘warts and all’ report, to use the vernacular, so it also reports some bad news.

I do not take issue with any of the items that Senator Siewert has pulled out of the report. There is no doubt that because of the massive changes to the Murray-Darling system—the fact that it is a system that has been highly altered by mankind—wetlands in that water course, particularly the Coorong wetlands, have been substantially affected and need repair. That is the reason that the Commonwealth government is investing hundreds of millions of dollars in projects to repair that system. The great news about the Living Murray project is that, for the first time in Australian history, you now have all of the jurisdictions—the Queensland, New South Wales, Victorian and South Australian governments—involved, with a focus on delivering environmental flows to the Murray.

Contrary to the propaganda put out by the Australian Labor Party in particular, the great news is that in cooperation with two of the state Labor governments there will be 35 gigalitres of water delivered to environmental projects at Chowilla and Hattah, icon sites. Of course, repair of the Kooyong—sorry; that would be good for a tennis court repairer! I mean the Coorong. Repair of other iconic sites along the Murray will rely not only on the combination of state Labor governments working with the Commonwealth government to bring hundreds of millions of dollars of investment but also, practically speaking, on some substantial rain falling into the catchment.

The problem the Labor Party and the Greens have with their policy, which is to deliver 1,500 gigalitres of water into the Murray, is that it is yet another example of a slogan that Labor and the Greens continue to refer to as a substitute for a detailed environmental policy. The problem they have, and the problem I invite them to address, is: firstly, exactly where are they going to find the 1,500 gigalitres of water—where are they going to get it from; and, secondly, how are they going to pay for it? We are putting in hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of water to find 500 gigalitres, working with the states in a cooperative way, and the best we have been able to do this year is make a good start with 35 gigalitres. The trouble with the Greens and Labor’s policy on the Murray and repair of wetlands along the Murray is that not even 1,500 gigalitres have flowed into the entire Murray-Darling Basin this year. If the water does not exist, it is pretty hard to deliver it to the environment and, of course, impossible to deliver it to the environment without denying it to all of the agricultural and horticultural interests along the Murray-Darling Basin. So you need to have a policy that balances those. The policy of Labor and the Greens entirely ignores that balance.

In relation to the Gwydir wetlands, the Commonwealth has invested in excess of $13 million in the repair of those wetlands. We want to see that money spent, we want to see some water go into those Gwydir wetlands and we need to have the cooperation of the New South Wales government as well as that of some of the landholders around the Gwydir wetlands to make sure the water actually gets there. We have put our money on the table. We need to see the water delivered. We would like to see both those very important wetlands looked after under the auspices of the commitments that we have to the Ramsar convention. (Time expired)