Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the senators who have contributed to discussion on this motion and I particularly commend the opposition and Senator Xenophon for recognising the importance of this amendment to the rural community. Minister Wong has said: ‘Well, you can rely on other parts of the act with words like ‘can’ or ‘may’, and somebody will decide somewhere down the line’—against the might of a corporation like BHP Billiton—‘whether or not a study should proceed. Then there is the previous commitment to exclude land use planning and resource management. Therefore, this amendment should not stand.’ Well, you cannot have it both ways. This amendment says there must be a study—it is very clear about that—particularly to look at the impact on water. This legislation is about a holistic view of the water catchment of the Murray-Darling Basin, and you cannot have that holistic view if some other operator can come in and have a major impact on that water resource through another activity. This amendment makes it quite explicit for people in the basin that that must be a study. It is not just the Namoi catchment; other parts of the basin are threatened by exactly the same process of mining coming in and cutting across the water resource in a way which could be detrimental—as one of our colleagues from the National Party has pointed out—for potentially 1,000 years, forever, to the crop-producing potential of that region. It is just plain common sense.

What Senator Wong has not done is outline a reason against the need for a study. She said, ‘We’ll leave it to somebody else to do that study.’ I have always been one for being clear in legislation and saying, ‘The parliament is saying a study ought to be done in these circumstances and it ought to be independent.’ If the study shows that there is not going to be an impact on water then the activity can proceed. If the study shows that there is a substantial risk then the farmland should be protected against that impact. So there it is.

I might add that there is an extremely good proposal for the Liverpool Plains to have an independent study done. It has been supported by the Liverpool Plains Land Management Committee, the New South Wales Farmers Association, Namoi Water, Gunnedah Shire, Liverpool Plains Shire, Narrabri Shire and the Namoi Catchment Management Authority. This would involve top expertise from the University of New South Wales, the University of New England and the University of Queensland, and then Dr John Williams, the New South Wales natural resources commissioner, having a look at the very matter that is at stake here, which is the proposed mining under the Liverpool Plains. Where is that study? Why is it not happening, if this can be left to some other device? It ought to be happening. It is what is called a stitch in time. I commend the opposition and Senator Xenophon for supporting this amendment. It is a very important addition to this legislation, and we as parliamentarians should be making sure that we are as clear as this amendment is about our intention to ensure that the water catchment in its totality is protected.