Rex Patrick (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Joyce, the now Deputy Prime Minister, committed a coup in this building. He's a person who has caused nothing but difficulty with the Basin Plan. He has actively stated that he doesn't believe we will ever get the 450, even though it was agreed. It was the compromise position between all of the stakeholders and between all of the states. That was what was agreed. We now have a Deputy Prime Minister in a government that purportedly supports the plan who doesn't actually support the plan. We're now seeing that getting played out. It is getting played out by the Nationals here who have self-interest and are manoeuvring themselves for positions in the cabinet. That's what's happening here. It's all about self-interest. It's about self-interest over national interest. That's what's happening here—no question. There is no sensible reason as to why the amendments of the Nationals should get any support at all—none whatsoever. There's no scientific basis. It's about the Nationals supporting not irrigators but big irrigators—alpha irrigators who think any drop of water that flows past their property is wasted water.

I don't even understand why Senator Davey is standing up for this. She knows that in her community they are suffering. I share her concerns. They are suffering because they have to bear all of the load to get water to South Australia, because it's all being taken in the northern basin. And you allowed that to happen. Your minister allowed that to happen. That's the problem. We've got Victorian senators in here trying to break the plan when, in actual fact, what is going wrong is that there is just too much water being taken out of the river system in the northern basin, so none flows down the Darling River. That means the Victorians have to bear all the load. I feel a bit sorry for them, but the solution is not in the amendments that have been proposed by these Victorian Nationals. The remedy is in dealing with the overextraction in the northern basin.

Senator McKenzie interjecting—

It is absolutely true, Senator McKenzie, but you wouldn't know about science. I will go to Richard Beasley, who wrote a book recently on the river system. Let me read what he said: 'Several people involved in agriculture and in other basin states, and some of the politicians they support, consider any water that flows out of the Murray River to be an exercise in irrigating the Southern Ocean. These people are idiots.' I will let the Australian public make their own minds up about who these idiots are, but it's pretty obvious and it's pretty present. This is just complete stupidity.

We have a plan. It's not the best plan for South Australia, but it's a compromise plan. It's a compromise between all of the different users of the plan. It's not perfect. It requires commitment from everyone. It requires sacrifice. But everyone understands that if the sacrifice occurs we will end up with a sustainable river system, or something that comes close to it—noting that already the numbers have been compromised. The original plan was 2,750. We went to an extra 450, which is owed to South Australia and was agreed by everyone, but the real number ought to have been somewhere between 3,900 gigalitres and 7,600 gigalitres.

Senator McKenzie interjecting—

I've got Senator McKenzie interjecting, suggesting that there was no science in those numbers. Absolutely there was. That was the finding of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority; it just didn't suit the politics of the Nationals. Every second week in New South Wales the Nationals threaten to leave the basin plan. New South Wales is a petulant child, with various Nationals ministers in control of the water system there. This is what they're like. They have no regard for sustainable agriculture. They're simply looking after big irrigators. That's all they are doing, and it's not acceptable. What has to happen here is the government needs to take charge.

I know that with my fellow South Australians in this place—and I've had a talk to some of my parliamentary colleagues in the other place—if the government supports this there will be extreme difficulty. I can tell you, right now, I will block my phone from every minister in the federal government. I won't be talking to them about any legislation. They can play Russian roulette if they want. This amendment cannot go through. It cannot be supported by the government.

Do you know what? If the government doesn't support it, that tells you something: there's a split in the coalition. When you've got a split, when you've got a party that is not complying with the policy position of the government, the last thing you can do is let their member be the minister. You can't have the Liberal Party saying, 'We support the plan but we're going to give the water portfolio to the Nationals,' when they don't support the plan. The evidence of that is clear. Previous statements that have been made by Barnaby Joyce and the amendment that's been circulated today by the Nationals tell you there's a split, and it can't be allowed to stand.

The Nationals need to be stripped of the water portfolio. They cannot be trusted with the water portfolio, and it's inconsistent with coalition policy. It's quite unbelievable. Scott Morrison, the Prime Minister, now has to show leadership and remove the Nationals from the portfolio. Replace the water minister with someone from—

An honourable senator: South Australia.

the Liberal Party. I don't say it has to be a South Australian; it just has to be someone sensible. I can't believe what is going on. This is a disgrace. At the end of the day, I support the idea of an inspector-general, because that will give strength to the program. I note that we used to have a commission that looked after compliance. That was stripped by the Abbott government. Now it's coming back. That was a huge mistake they made. Throughout that process, where we didn't have that compliance, we had rorting and theft on the river. That does no-one any good, including other irrigators. That's the situation we find ourselves in. We've got to get back to the point where we do have an inspector-general.

In terms of amendments, I have circulated one that does seek to remove authority or an overreach where the Murray-Darling Basin Authority is seeking extraordinary powers. I will also advise the chamber that I do not intend to move my second reading amendment.