Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh, good luck!

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Macdonald. Does the decision of the South Australian Labor government to pursue High Court action against the Victorian Labor government and possibly other state governments delay or place at risk the implementation of the Rudd Labor government’s Murray-Darling plan?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The biggest threat to the implementation of reforms in the Murray-Darling Basin appears to Mr Springborg, who in the Queensland election has essentially put at risk the reforms and the agreement which was put in place by this government with the agreement of all state premiers. As a senator from South Australia, which is a state that has a strong interest in a whole-of-basin approach, I suggest to Senator Birmingham that perhaps he should get on the phone to Mr Springborg and tell him this is not an issue on which he should play petty politics. This is an issue where the national interest requires that the states work together and we look to a whole-of-basin approach for the first time in Australia’s history. That is the reality. The leader who has been the only one to suggest—

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order on the matter of direct relevance under standing orders. The question was very specific about Mr Rann’s action—his decision to drag this water basin plan through the court system. It referred not to any state opposition leader’s actions but rather to the Labor Premier of South Australia. We are more than halfway through the answer and the minister has not deigned to mention the South Australian government’s actions even once.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, there are 54 seconds left in which to address the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can understand why Senator Birmingham feels embarrassed because, of course, this is Mr Turnbull’s plan, supposedly, as well. He is essentially asking a question which invites the response, ‘Actually, it is the Liberal National Party in Queensland that is the only party prepared to talk about putting at risk the Murray-Darling agreement that was forged between the Prime Minister and the state premiers.’ I am aware of Mr Rann’s comments and I have made public comments about them. As I understand it, Mr Rann has indicated that he has asked a legal team to prepare a case. The Commonwealth’s position has been clear for some time. We believe it is in the best interests of the rivers and of irrigators for there to be an open water market, and we have been working to achieve that. That is an issue that has been discussed at COAG on a number of occasions. So the Commonwealth’s position in relation to the water market is clear. (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question that goes to the matter of the water agreement itself. Has it in any way changed since Mr Rann so willingly and enthusiastically signed it and welcomed it last July and, if not, why is he choosing to pursue this court action now, and will the Commonwealth be taking a stand in this court action?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the last issue, that is a hypothetical until any such action is taken. Senator Birmingham, I would refer you to my first answer, which outlined the fact that, as I understand the Premier’s indication, he wants a legal case prepared, but no such action to date has been taken. I again make the point that the South Australian government has not indicated any withdrawal of support for the agreement itself. And I would suggest to the senator from the good state of South Australia that those of us from that state do need to take a whole-of-basin approach to this issue. Many of the problems in the Murray-Darling Basin are in place because there has been a failure by past governments, including 12 years under those opposite, to take a whole-of-basin approach. It has been one where we simply looked only at the issues from the perspective of one state. (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given the minister has described Premier Rann’s much vaunted and much hyped legal action as ‘hypothetical’, what steps is the minister taking or has the minister taken to try to persuade the South Australian Labor government and the Victorian Labor government to reach an agreement that might be settled without the need for High Court action on these critical issues?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am surprised, if I may say, that Senator Birmingham, who is usually one of the more assiduous senators on that side, has not taken the time to consider these issues more closely. He would recall that we have had this issue on the COAG agenda. There is already a decision of COAG as to a timetable for consideration of the four per cent. If those opposite want to take a constructive approach to this, I would suggest they clarify their view on whether or not the opposition remain locked in behind the four per cent, or does that depend on where the senator opposite comes from?