Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Hansard source

I think perhaps Mother Nature will be the referee on this one. I do not particularly absolutely agree with what we have ended up with, but I think the input we have had from the coalition on this side of the chamber has at least meant that we have had an outcome that is far, far better than it otherwise would have been if the Greens and other people had got what they wanted. They wanted to have a rampant road down an environmental path, without considering this in a balanced way, so God forbid what we could have ended up with. This plan is not perfect, by any stretch of the imagination, and those on this side know that. But it is only because of those on this side of the chamber that we have ended up with something better than what could have been an absolute dog's breakfast.

The recommendations made by the committee are very good. What struck me when reading through them was the sorts of things we are recommending. For example:

The committee recommends that the MDBA provide a clear explanation of how 'localism' is to be implemented under the Basin Plan.

The committee recommends that the government develop and publish a detailed policy for agricultural productivity, environmental and water resource R&D in the Murray-Darling Basin.

It also recommends that there should be a research strategy for future water interception. Interception is something that most of this country—most of the decision-makers around this—does not have its head around. I have to commend Senator Heffernan for the work that he has done in raising this issue on interception, because barely anybody else talked about it until we got into it in this committee.

There are recommendations like:

… the government prioritise R&D into water infrastructure to meet the needs of farming communities …

Why is this Senate committee having to make these recommendations? The government should be doing this anyway. It just shows how out of touch this Labor government is with what is needed for these communities in the Murray-Darling Basin for our Senate committee to have to come up with these recommendations. This is something that, if the government had any sense or sensibility, and any real understanding of what is going on out there, they would have been doing anyway.

Senator Rushton is sitting next to me and nodding her head, and I will take that as an interjection! Thank you Senator Ruston. I commend her and also my colleague behind me, Senator McKenzie, for the work that they have done in trying to at least make some progress towards getting a better plan and outcome for the Murray-Darling Basin.

Conscious of my colleagues, there is—as Senator Heffernan said earlier—much to talk about around these issues. Now is not the time as we obviously have time constraints upon us. But in this report we try to get a good, balanced outcome for those in regional communities and for those in the Murray-Darling Basin communities that were not getting that approach and that tack from this Labor government. There are an awful lot of people out there in regional communities who have been hurt very badly by this process. Hopefully, the government will take into consideration properly and in a detailed way the recommendations that we have made, because they have been made on very good evidence and they have been made with the will of the Senate committee trying to get a better outcome for the people of the regional communities across the Murray-Darling Basin. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted.