Tuesday, 14 November 2023

Water policy

Rikkie-Lee TYRRELL (Northern Victoria) (12:34): (348) My question is for the Minister for Water. With the recent talk surrounding the federal Senate inquiry into the Murray–Darling Basin plan and its advocacy for more voluntary water buybacks and also the talk indicating the potential for compulsory buybacks, the requirement to find an additional 450 gigalitres for environmental purposes means that without question our irrigators are going to wear the brunt of this decision. What is the minister doing to ensure water security for our irrigators?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:35): Thank you, Mrs Tyrrell, for that question. At the moment, we are in a process of discussion and debate at a federal level about the future of the Murray–Darling Basin plan. At the heart of this discussion is a question about the future of the Murray–Darling Basin, which is an interlinked system of rivers and waterways. It is important to note that since the plan was first signed up to by various jurisdictions, including the Commonwealth and Victoria, in 2012, there has been significant progress achieved, chiefly by Victoria, in recovery of water for the environment. In 2018 all jurisdictions party to the Murray–Darling Basin plan signed up to what is known as the socio-economic criteria, meaning that water could not be returned if it did harm to communities – that is, that any return would need to satisfy a test of positive or neutral socio-economic outcomes for communities.

Victoria remains committed to achieving the outcomes and the objectives of our share of returning environmental water to the plan in the terms that we agreed. Victoria opposes buybacks. We oppose buybacks for a range of reasons and based on modelling, which, despite some narrative to the contrary, withstands rigorous analysis, not only from Frontier Economics but also from the Murray–Darling Basin Authority’s own data around the impact of buybacks on communities and towns, showing that irrigated production job losses of over 40 per cent were observed in Victorian communities due to water recovery for the environment, including in Cobram, 40 per cent of job losses; Kerang, 43 per cent of job losses; Cohuna, 43 per cent of job losses; Kyabram, 42 per cent of job losses; Tatura, 42 per cent of job losses; Rochester, 42 per cent of job losses; Pyramid Hill, 66 per cent of job losses; Boort, 66 per cent of job losses; Shepparton, 61 per cent of job losses; Swan Hill, 53 per cent of job losses; Red Cliffs, 76 per cent of job losses; and Merbein, 50 per cent of job losses.

We are determined to continue our work to return environmental water and to maintain rigour, transparency and accountability through increased monitoring, enforcement and compliance in Victoria for water entitlement holders. It is also important to note that politics does not underpin the work that we are doing here in Victoria to return water to the environment. It is a shame that some people frame it in this way. We are determined to continue to work with all parties, noting that we cannot send water from the southern basin to the northern basin from Victoria; it is simply not possible.