Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Hansard source

It is my understanding that, right here, right now, the minister is again in the process of having a press conference with our colleague Senator David Van. We have not yet seen the circulation of the amendments that the press conference is talking about. We have just seen Senator Van's second reading amendment pass, with our support because we do fundamentally support in principle enabling the government to use all available options when considering how they will recover water. I understand that the government has amendments through this committee process to facilitate the proposal in Senator Van second reading amendment. They will enable the bill to allow the option of forward leasing, instead of purchase, for the Commonwealth to recover environmental water. I fundamentally agree with that.

We would also like to see—and we will be moving amendments through this process—the government acknowledge complementary measures and rules changes as part of environmental recovery and as part of the Basin Plan. We know that the hard work hasn't been done by the department or this government of looking seriously at how that moves, so we have an amendment before us to require the government to undertake an independent review of complementary measures—things like fish passage, cold water pollution, addressing riparian vegetation and rules changes. We know that the New South Wales government has actually called on this government to do that work to enable rules changes to form part of the recovery process. We're calling on the minister to require that that work be done and not just accept when the department says: 'It's all too hard. We don't want to look at it.' It's much easier to rely on the transfer of a piece of paper. A licence is effectively only a piece of paper. That's what this government has been relying on.

We do support the work that will now go into looking to enable long-term leases. Either way, we believe it's appropriate for farmers to hold onto their water entitlements and be able to lease them to the Commonwealth at certain times and in certain scenarios. We believe that is one of a swathe of options that should be on the table for the government to consider. I congratulate my colleague Senator Van for his efforts to make sure that that gets across the line. It's funny that in the past I myself raised that option with the government. Admittedly, at the time I raised it I was not fobbed off immediately, but clearly the minister has determined that she will talk to the Independents more than she'll talk to the opposition on this.

A lot of the government's amendments before us do raise significant questions, particularly when it comes to the idea of a one-off SDL adjustment. I will have questions for the minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water to try and get to the bottom of what that one-off adjustment means, particularly as to whether both credits and debits will be given equal weight and whether those one-off adjustments then go on the register and will be carried forward—and carried forward after water resource plans have been accredited. I note that these amendments were circulated only late yesterday. From my reading, it appears that the one-off adjustments are to allow for recording on the register of take in areas where there aren't resource plans accredited.

There are also questions about what the leases will look like and whether there are any case studies or examples the government can point us to to make sure that our interpretation of leasing is actually consistent with what is going to be in the bill. There are questions about the expansion of the additional held environmental water to be water access rights, water delivery rights or irrigation rates—or part thereof—and about whether those are the areas that facilitate leasing. I have some further questions about the meaning of the Greens amendments, specifically in relation to what some of the notes mean, and I will be asking about those through this process.

To cut to the chase, this is a moving feast, and it has always been a moving feast. The Basin Plan has for many years enjoyed bipartisan support. We did approach the government to talk about keeping the socioeconomic test for the recovery of additional environmental water. I understand that that is part of what is being talked about at the press conference that is underway right now, but we have not seen that amendment, and I really need to ensure that that amendment will go far enough. Not having seen that amendment, I have proposed an amendment that will insert a socioeconomic test into the bill, which I know is robust, which I know is consistent with the 2018 agreement of the Murray Darling Basin Ministerial Council and which has the support of basin communities from top to bottom, including South Australian basin communities, which I know everyone likes to fob off on one another.

There are so many questions, Minister. Through the committee phase, I should start asking those questions. The first question is: are you able to explain, Minister, the purpose of the one-off adjustments? Can you clarify that they are just to allow the register of take to record, in the absence of accredited water resource plans, where basin valleys or water resource plan areas are at, or do these one-off adjustments apply to any water resource plan area?