Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Senator Conroy. Will the minister tell the Senate how much of the $5.9 billion budgeted in 2007 for water-saving infrastructure projects has been spent and will he further advise the Senate what volume of entitlements has been transferred to the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder as a result of these projects?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Birmingham for his question. The Australian government believes in a sustainable Australia. We are committed to supporting our rural and regional communities in adjusting to a future with less water and to restoring the health of the Murray-Darling Basin. The government is trying to achieve three key outcomes, as we have talked about before, Mr President, to deliver a healthy river system, acknowledging the importance of food production and delivering strong regional communities. The government is investing more than $12 billion in the Water for the Future initiative to help communities adjust to a future with less water. The government has committed $5.8 billion in funding for water infrastructure and efficiency measures under the SRWUIP. Of this, around $4.9 billion is currently committed for the Murray-Darling Basin. The investment will help place irrigation communities on a better footing to deal with climate change that will reduce water availability. It will contribute substantially to closing the gap to achieve the new sustainable diversion limits under the MDB plan.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. While the minister is addressing generally the topic, he was asked two very narrow questions, the answer to each of which is to give us a quantity: how much has been spent and what volumes have been transferred? He has not attempted to address either of those questions. He cannot be directly relevant in failing to provide the two quantities sought. You should direct him to the question or require him to resume his seat.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister was answering the question. Clearly, the question went to the program Water for the Future, and in dealing with the question the minister was responding and he was directly relevant to the question. The minister was going to the issues of water for the future and, within the Murray-Darling, how much was being spent as a water-saving initiative. That is what the issue was about and the minister was being directly relevant on that issue.

What we now have as a point of order are two specific issues that were within the question. Those opposite are entitled to hear the remaining 48 seconds that the minister has got to complete his answer. Mr President, I ask you to then to rule them as having no point of order.

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

Senator Brandis, I am listening closely to the minister’s answer. The minister has 48 seconds remaining.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Key programs within the SRWUIP include 16 state priority projects, SPPs, as well as the Menindee project, up to $400 million; the On-Farm Irrigation Efficiency Program, $300 million—you are taking notes, are you, Rumpole?—the Strengthening Basin Community Program, $200 million; and $140 million for irrigation efficiency upgrades in Tasmania. A major state priority project, the Northern Victoria Irrigation Renewal Project, stage 2, was announced on 6 November 2010.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a point of order, Mr President. It goes to the changes to the standing orders that this chamber passed in relation to the change from relevance to direct relevance. The minister is talking about water projects and infrastructure projects and that might be relevant. But the minister was asked very specifically for two pieces of information. He has now taken one minute and 53 seconds and, given that neither of those two specific pieces of information has been supplied, if direct relevance is to mean anything in this chamber the minister’s attention needs to be brought to those two specific pieces of information or he should be sat down.

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

On the point of order, I have been listening to the minister’s answer and the minister has been detailing a number of amounts of expenditure.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Order! Excuse me. I am not in a debate. If you want a ruling, you will get a ruling, but I am not going to debate it with you. I am listening to the minister’s answer very closely. I said that in response to Senator Brandis’s earlier point of order. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question that you have asked. I am listening to see that the question that you have asked is being addressed, but it might not be addressed with the specific answer that you want and in the specific way you want the answer to be delivered. That is my difficulty. I have explained that as previous presidents before me have explained it.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As you have not ruled yet, I wish to speak to Senator Birmingham’s point of order.

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

I am ruling at this stage that I am listening to the response that has come forward and the minister still has seven seconds remaining. At this stage I cannot say that the minister has not been answering the question. He might not be answering the question in the terms that you desire but I cannot instruct the minister, and if you read the precedents of this chamber you will find that that is the case.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If I may briefly, Mr President, the precedents in relation to the points of order and all the previous rulings that you refer to refer to different standing orders. We actually amended the sessional orders in this place to require ministers to be directly relevant. That was a specific change made by this chamber to ensure that ministers were relevant. To now rely on previous precedents absent of the change made to the sessional orders is, with respect, Mr President, not to understand or give fulfilment to the changes that the Senate voted on specifically to overcome the shortcomings of ministers such as Senator Conroy.

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

I will go out and I will review what has transpired, but I believe that the ruling that I have made is the correct ruling, and I call Senator Conroy.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. At 31 October 2010, $437 million of administered funding had been spent under SRWUIP. (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a supplementary question. I thank the minister for getting to half of the question eventually. It would have been far easier to do that in the first place. Is the minister aware that in every year Labor have been in office they have underspent the budget on water-saving infrastructure projects? Given that, will the minister confirm that this trend is set to continue under Labor, with the MYEFO document exposing a further delay in delivering water-saving infrastructure by pushing $450 million out beyond the forward estimates?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Projects under the $300 million On-Farm Irrigation Efficiency Program will help irrigation communities in the Lachlan and southern connected MDB. In principle, funding of up to $100 million has been announced for six applicants under round 1 of the On-Farm Irrigation Efficiency Program. These projects will provide water savings of up to 60 gigalitres. To date, four funding agreements have been signed. Round 2 will be launched in due course. Administered expenditure under the On-Farm Irrigation Efficiency Program as at 31 October was $11.1 million. There has been $44 million in grants committed for 75 projects under the Strengthening Basin Communities Program. This will involve 60 per cent of the local government authorities in the MDB. There is $3.7 billion provided for the SPPs, of which $3.2 billion is funded from the SRWUIP. (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Can the minister explain, given all that he has hailed, why the government has once again failed to meet its own deadline of 30 October in relation to progress on the Menindee Lakes redevelopment? Can the minister also explain how it is that Labor can waste billions of dollars on dodgy government programs yet is unable to deliver projects that would provide water savings to help the environment without crippling farmers? With the lack of direction and no agenda from this government, how will this latest deferral of spending in MYEFO build any community support for Murray-Darling reform?

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

Mr President, I ask you to look at that question and the first two questions of this question hour to see if they conform with standing order 73 and report back to the chamber, if you would.

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

I will look at that, Senator Bob Brown.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am glad that Senator Birmingham wants to discuss community support because just recently, on 10 November this year, the Bendigo Advertiser, on page 29, stated:

Stage 2 of the food bowl project gets the nod.

Victorian Farmers Federation President, Andrew Broad, said:

The practical impact this announcement will have on-farm should not be underestimated.

The National Farmers Federation media release on 19 March 2010 on the government’s $300 million on-farm water efficiency project stated:

This important program is a victory for the future of many irrigation communities, assisting irrigators to produce more food and fibre with less water, and to align on-farm infrastructure with irrigation delivery system investment.

The Australian of 11 October stated on page 5:

THE National Farmers Federation has called for greater investment in water efficiency across the Murray-Darling Basin.

              …              …              …

Ms Kerr said many of the state governments had already flagged “priority projects” where—

(Time expired)