Water policy
Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (12:13): (124) My question is to the Minister for Water, and it is regarding the Victorian government’s management of the Murray-Darling Basin. In 2013 the Victorian government agreed to implement the constraints relaxation strategy, which would take a proactive approach to ensuring the health of our river systems and adjoining wetlands, yet 10 years on from this agreement the Victorian government has made next to no progress on even preliminary aspects of this strategy. Why have the government failed to follow through on their promise to implement constraints relaxation in order to protect communities and our environment?
Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Water, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Commonwealth Games Legacy, Minister for Equality) (12:14): Thank you very much for that question. It is a really important question, and to that end I am really grateful for the opportunity to talk about what we are doing to balance competing priorities and interests around delivery of our obligations and commitments under the plan.
As you would be aware, and as we have discussed already, there is a really long and complex history associated with the diversion and the change to the path of the Murray and the basin plan overall, which has led to a greater capacity for food producers to be able to generate some of the most important products on our supermarket shelves, on our tables and in our lunchboxes. This has also been something which has been discussed at length over many, many years, including to rebuild and to repair some of the damage done by former coalition governments, who were inactive on the Murray Basin plan and the work that we needed to do to deliver on our commitments.
What I want to do is also highlight, in response to your question, the work that has been done since we saw a change in the federal government and since we saw Minister Plibersek come to the table as the water minister of firstly being able to convene a ministerial meeting. We had not had one since December 2020, and we have now had two since the change of government federally. While we do have a range of divergent views on how it is that we can all achieve our obligations and commitments under the plan, it is important to note that Victoria has met our Bridging the Gap targets and indeed is seeking an extension of two years to the time frames from 2024 to 2026. We will be able to deliver on 95 per cent of our obligations under the plan or indeed 98 per cent when we factor in constraints.
When we talk about the way in which sustainable diversion occurs and the way in which we make a better use of the resource with less resource, including using infrastructure and a range of opportunities to bring water to where it is needed rather than simply to wait for an inundation of water through a river system that sends it over banks and therefore does not make the best use of that resource, we can see that flood plains are able to rejuvenate. We are able to see that inundation – the water sitting on flood plains – then being able to recede, which as you would be aware, really enhances the opportunity for black box, for scrub and for this enormously important and fragile landscape to be maintained as it has been for thousands of years. It is also really important that as we work towards achieving our plans on the VMFRP we take account of what are some of the largest heritage and Aboriginal burial sites across the state. We have seen significant progress on the four projects that we have got on foot. I would really like to see that we have an opportunity to work with the Commonwealth minister on an extension to deliver the other five.
Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (12:17): Thank you for that wideranging answer. You did touch on something I think related to constraints relaxation, and that was the construction of two flood plain restoration projects that the government has chosen to prioritise rather than follow through on its commitment to constraints relaxation. As the Age reported in early April, these so-called restoration projects are very expensive to build and maintain, they are opposed by traditional owners and they are far too narrowly focused to deliver holistic ecosystem health. In fact the government has spent $54 million just on planning these projects. They have had to review two of the current projects because they have failed to meet their environmental outcomes. Will the government continue to ignore its constraints relaxation promises in favour of costly experimental restoration projects despite community and cultural objection?
Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Water, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Commonwealth Games Legacy, Minister for Equality) (12:17): Thank you for that supplementary. There are a couple things in that that I do want to take issue with. On the one hand, we do have research that indicates, notwithstanding what you have just said, that these projects to deliver water through that infrastructure are actually working. On the other hand, we also have many traditional owners who I have spoken with and met with and who I talk to and who the department talks with who actually recognise the value of what these environmental opportunities look like. The VMFRP and the water return that we are making available will see water brought back to 14,000 hectares of the flood plain across the north of the state. This is about making sure that we utilise infrastructure – and again I would really, really encourage you to get out and see this – which is not a significant impost on the landscape. It is infrastructure that has been proven, that has been there for many decades in a couple of instances and which is actually having significant benefit. Head up north. I will show you around, and you can see how it is working.